Overcoming pitfalls: Results from a mandatory peer review process for written examinations.

Clicks: 248
ID: 127916
2018
Written assessments are essential components of higher education practices. However, faculty members encounter common pitfalls when designing questions intended to evaluate student-learning outcomes. The objective of this project was to determine the impact of a mandatory examination peer review process on question accuracy, alignment with learning objectives, use of best practices in question design, and language/grammar.A mandatory peer review process was implemented for all midterm (before phase) and final (after phase) examinations. Peer review occurred by two reviewers and followed a pre-defined guidance document. Non-punitive feedback given to faculty members served as the intervention. Frequencies of flagged questions according to guidance categories were compared between phases.A total of 21 midterm and 21 final exam reviews were included in the analysis. A total of 637 questions were reviewed across all midterms and 1003 questions were reviewed across all finals. Few questions were flagged for accuracy and alignment with learning outcomes. The median total proportion of questions flagged for best practices was significantly lower for final exams versus midterm exams (15.8 vs. 6.45%, p = 0.014). The intervention did not influence language and grammar errors (9.68 vs. 10.0% of questions flagged before and after, respectively, p = 0.305).A non-punitive peer review process for written examinations can overcome pitfalls in exam creation and improve best practices in question writing. The peer-review process had a substantial effect at flagging language/grammar errors but error rate did not differ between midterm and final exams.
Reference Key
wilby2018overcomingcurrents Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Wilby, Kyle John;El Hajj, Maguy S;El-Bashir, Marwa;Mraiche, Fatima;
Journal Currents in pharmacy teaching & learning
Year 2018
DOI S1877-1297(17)30135-1
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.