生物化学中传统作文题与基于案例的修改作文题的比较。

IF 1.2 4区 教育学 Q4 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education Pub Date : 2023-06-10 DOI:10.1002/bmb.21756
Aastha Bansal, Abhishek Dubey, Vijay Kumar Singh, Binita Goswami, Smita Kaushik
{"title":"生物化学中传统作文题与基于案例的修改作文题的比较。","authors":"Aastha Bansal,&nbsp;Abhishek Dubey,&nbsp;Vijay Kumar Singh,&nbsp;Binita Goswami,&nbsp;Smita Kaushik","doi":"10.1002/bmb.21756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Adult learning involves the analysis and synthesis of knowledge to become competent, which cannot be assessed only by traditional assessment tool and didactic learning methods. Stimulation of higher domains of cognitive learning needs to be inculcated to reach a better understanding of the subject rather than traditional assessment tools that relies primarily on rote learning. So, there is need for an alternative assessment tool. Hence, we conducted a study where we used case-based examination methodology. This study was conducted on 226 Ist year MBBS students in Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi (India). Based on their compiled internal assessment marks according to monthly formative assessment, students were categorized into 3 groups (I: 0–7; II: 8–14; III: 15–20) marks out of 20 marks respectively. Two sets of question papers were set by three examiners, on the same topics carrying 50 marks each. The first set was based on traditional assessment tool (Paper-A) with recall questions and second set on case-based assessment method (Paper-B). Out of 226 students, 146 were males and 80 were females. For all groups, marks (mean ± SD) in Paper B were found to be higher (18.40 ± 4.29, 30.01 ± 4.12, and 40.33 ± 1.15) as compared to paper A (10.88 ± 4.34, 21.96 ± 7.34, and 31.50 ± 6.94) respectively. However, we found that there was significant (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) difference in group I &amp; II, whereas with group III, difference was found to be insignificant. Hence, we concluded that students performed better in case-based assessment rather than traditional method due to their direct involvement. Thus, for better memory and deeper learning the subjects can be assessed by case-based assessment method.</p>","PeriodicalId":8830,"journal":{"name":"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education","volume":"51 5","pages":"494-498"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of traditional essay questions versus case based modified essay questions in biochemistry\",\"authors\":\"Aastha Bansal,&nbsp;Abhishek Dubey,&nbsp;Vijay Kumar Singh,&nbsp;Binita Goswami,&nbsp;Smita Kaushik\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/bmb.21756\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Adult learning involves the analysis and synthesis of knowledge to become competent, which cannot be assessed only by traditional assessment tool and didactic learning methods. Stimulation of higher domains of cognitive learning needs to be inculcated to reach a better understanding of the subject rather than traditional assessment tools that relies primarily on rote learning. So, there is need for an alternative assessment tool. Hence, we conducted a study where we used case-based examination methodology. This study was conducted on 226 Ist year MBBS students in Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi (India). Based on their compiled internal assessment marks according to monthly formative assessment, students were categorized into 3 groups (I: 0–7; II: 8–14; III: 15–20) marks out of 20 marks respectively. Two sets of question papers were set by three examiners, on the same topics carrying 50 marks each. The first set was based on traditional assessment tool (Paper-A) with recall questions and second set on case-based assessment method (Paper-B). Out of 226 students, 146 were males and 80 were females. For all groups, marks (mean ± SD) in Paper B were found to be higher (18.40 ± 4.29, 30.01 ± 4.12, and 40.33 ± 1.15) as compared to paper A (10.88 ± 4.34, 21.96 ± 7.34, and 31.50 ± 6.94) respectively. However, we found that there was significant (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.001) difference in group I &amp; II, whereas with group III, difference was found to be insignificant. Hence, we concluded that students performed better in case-based assessment rather than traditional method due to their direct involvement. Thus, for better memory and deeper learning the subjects can be assessed by case-based assessment method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education\",\"volume\":\"51 5\",\"pages\":\"494-498\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bmb.21756\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bmb.21756","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

成人学习涉及到对知识的分析和综合,以使其胜任,而这不能仅仅通过传统的评估工具和说教式的学习方法来评估。需要灌输对认知学习更高领域的刺激,以更好地理解学科,而不是主要依赖死记硬背的传统评估工具。因此,需要一种替代的评估工具。因此,我们进行了一项研究,使用了基于案例的检查方法。这项研究是对印度新德里Maulana Azad医学院226名一年级MBBS学生进行的。根据每月形成性评估的内部评估分数,学生被分为3组(I:0-7;II:8-14;III:115-20),分别为20分。三名考官就同一主题设置了两套试卷,每组50分。第一组基于传统的带有回忆问题的评估工具(Paper-A),第二组基于基于案例的评估方法(Paper-B)。226名学生中,146人为男性,80人为女性。对于所有组,标记(平均值 ± SD)较高(18.40 ± 2001年4月29日 ± 4.12和40.33 ± 1.15)与论文A(10.88 ± 4.34,21.96 ± 7.34和31.50 ± 6.94)。然而,我们发现
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of traditional essay questions versus case based modified essay questions in biochemistry

Adult learning involves the analysis and synthesis of knowledge to become competent, which cannot be assessed only by traditional assessment tool and didactic learning methods. Stimulation of higher domains of cognitive learning needs to be inculcated to reach a better understanding of the subject rather than traditional assessment tools that relies primarily on rote learning. So, there is need for an alternative assessment tool. Hence, we conducted a study where we used case-based examination methodology. This study was conducted on 226 Ist year MBBS students in Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi (India). Based on their compiled internal assessment marks according to monthly formative assessment, students were categorized into 3 groups (I: 0–7; II: 8–14; III: 15–20) marks out of 20 marks respectively. Two sets of question papers were set by three examiners, on the same topics carrying 50 marks each. The first set was based on traditional assessment tool (Paper-A) with recall questions and second set on case-based assessment method (Paper-B). Out of 226 students, 146 were males and 80 were females. For all groups, marks (mean ± SD) in Paper B were found to be higher (18.40 ± 4.29, 30.01 ± 4.12, and 40.33 ± 1.15) as compared to paper A (10.88 ± 4.34, 21.96 ± 7.34, and 31.50 ± 6.94) respectively. However, we found that there was significant (p < 0.001) difference in group I & II, whereas with group III, difference was found to be insignificant. Hence, we concluded that students performed better in case-based assessment rather than traditional method due to their direct involvement. Thus, for better memory and deeper learning the subjects can be assessed by case-based assessment method.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The aim of BAMBED is to enhance teacher preparation and student learning in Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and related sciences such as Biophysics and Cell Biology, by promoting the world-wide dissemination of educational materials. BAMBED seeks and communicates articles on many topics, including: Innovative techniques in teaching and learning. New pedagogical approaches. Research in biochemistry and molecular biology education. Reviews on emerging areas of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology to provide background for the preparation of lectures, seminars, student presentations, dissertations, etc. Historical Reviews describing "Paths to Discovery". Novel and proven laboratory experiments that have both skill-building and discovery-based characteristics. Reviews of relevant textbooks, software, and websites. Descriptions of software for educational use. Descriptions of multimedia materials such as tutorials on various aspects of biochemistry and molecular biology.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Cinemeducation improves early clinical exposure to inborn errors of metabolism. The development of supplemental multimedia learning modules and their impact on student learning in food biotechnology courses. Encourage self-learning and collaborative learning through gamification during COVID-19 pandemic: A case study for teaching biochemistry. A plant mutant screen CURE integrated with core biology concepts showed effectiveness in course design and students' perceived learning gains.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1