Traditional and nontraditional evaluations of student outcomes in a practical final examination of veterinary radiology.
The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Helsinki recognized the lack of systems to measure the quality of education. At the department level, this meant lack of systems to measure the quality of students' outcomes. The aim of this article was to compare the quality of outcomes of a final examination in veterinary radiology by calculating the correlations between traditional (quantitative scores traditionally given by veterinary teachers) and nontraditional (qualitative Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, or SOLO, method) grading results. Evaluation of the quality of the questions is also included. The results indicate that SOLO offers criteria for quality evaluation, especially for questions. A correlation of 0.60 (p<0.01) existed between qualitative and quantitative estimations, and a correlation of 0.79 (p<0.01) existed between evaluators, both using traditional scores. Two suggestions for a better system to evaluate quality in the future: First, development of problem-solving skills during the learning process should also be assessed. Second, both the scoring of factual correctness of answers (knowledge) and the grammatical structure of an answer and the quality of presentation should be included in the quality evaluation process.
Koskinen
Heli I
HI
Department of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, University of Helsinki, Finland. heli.i.koskinen@helsinki.fi
D000818:Animals; D003479:Curriculum; D004283:Dog Diseases / Q000628:therapy; D004285:Dogs; D004521:Educational Measurement / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005387:Finland; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning; D007886:Legislation, Veterinary / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008297:Male; D011871:Radiology / Q000379:methods; D013337:Students, Medical; D013663:Teaching; D014730:Veterinary Medicine / Q000592:standards*