Scholarlink

Background <p>Assessments in undergraduate and graduate medical education are crucial for evaluating the competencies of learners. Assessments have both a&#xa0;control function (summative) and a&#xa0;feedback function (formative). This distinction is important, as the two aspects cannot easily be combined, and, therefore, it must be considered which function should be emphasized in each case.</p> Objective <p>This article examines the formal requirements and quality criteria that assessments must meet, particularly with regard to objectivity, reliability, and validity.</p> Methods <p>Referring to classical test theory, the three main criteria that are decisive for the quality of examinations are discussed. In addition, potential judgment biases and how to avoid them are outlined, as is how to improve assessment items by means of typical item characteristics.</p> Results <p>Assessments should be independent of the examiners. Written exams, especially multiple-choice tests, offer greater objectivity than oral exams. Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) increase the objectivity of practical exams. A&#xa0;reliable exam reflects the actual performance of the examinees and is as free as possible from random effects. Verifying the validity of an exam is an ongoing process that involves many variables. Simple forms of validity are easier to determine but are less meaningful.</p> Conclusion <p>The quality of exams depends heavily on whether the abovementioned quality criteria are met. Systematic analysis of exam questions can be used to improve them in a&#xa0;targeted manner.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Formale Anforderungen an Prüfungen – worauf kommt es an?

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月5日

查看全文
  • Götz Fabry

摘要

Background

Assessments in undergraduate and graduate medical education are crucial for evaluating the competencies of learners. Assessments have both a control function (summative) and a feedback function (formative). This distinction is important, as the two aspects cannot easily be combined, and, therefore, it must be considered which function should be emphasized in each case.

Objective

This article examines the formal requirements and quality criteria that assessments must meet, particularly with regard to objectivity, reliability, and validity.

Methods

Referring to classical test theory, the three main criteria that are decisive for the quality of examinations are discussed. In addition, potential judgment biases and how to avoid them are outlined, as is how to improve assessment items by means of typical item characteristics.

Results

Assessments should be independent of the examiners. Written exams, especially multiple-choice tests, offer greater objectivity than oral exams. Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) increase the objectivity of practical exams. A reliable exam reflects the actual performance of the examinees and is as free as possible from random effects. Verifying the validity of an exam is an ongoing process that involves many variables. Simple forms of validity are easier to determine but are less meaningful.

Conclusion

The quality of exams depends heavily on whether the abovementioned quality criteria are met. Systematic analysis of exam questions can be used to improve them in a targeted manner.