The versatility of progress testing assessed in an international context: a start for benchmarking global standardization?
Sharing and collaboration relating to progress testing already takes place on a national level and allows for quality control and comparisons of the participating institutions. This study explores the possibilities of international sharing of the progress test after correction for cultural bias and translation problems. Three progress tests were reviewed and administered to 3043 Pretoria and 3001 Maastricht medical students. In total, 16% of the items were potentially biased and removed from the test items administered to the Pretoria students (9% due to translation problems; 7% due to cultural differences). Of the three clusters (basic, clinical and social sciences) the social sciences contained most bias (32%), basic sciences least (11%). The differences that were found, comparing the student results of both schools, seem a reflection of the deliberate accentuations that both curricula pursue. The results suggest that the progress test methodology provides a versatile instrument that can be used to assess medical schools across the world. Sharing of test material is a viable strategy and test outcomes are interesting and can be used in international quality control.
Verhoeven
B H
BH
Medical Centre Leeuwarden, The Netherlands. basverhoeven@mac.com
Snellen-Balendong
H A M
HA
Hay
I T
IT
Boon
J M
JM
van der Linde
M J
MJ
Blitz-Lindeque
J J
JJ
Hoogenboom
R J I
RJ
Verwijnen
G M
GM
Wijnen
W H F W
WH
Scherpbier
A J J A
AJ
van der Vleuten
C P M
CP
D019985:Benchmarking; D004504:Education, Medical, Undergraduate / Q000592:standards; D004521:Educational Measurement / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D007391:International Cooperation; D009426:Netherlands; D013019:South Africa; D013337:Students, Medical