arrow
返回

2018 Consensus framework for good assessment

delete2018-10-09
delete181
PRE
AI
J
John J. Norcini *
M
M. Brownell Anderson
V
Valdes Roberto Bóllela
V
Vanessa Burch
M
Manuel João Costa
R
Robbert Duvivier
R
Richard Hays
M
Maria Felisa Palacios Mackay
T
Trudie Roberts
D
David B. Swanson
DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2018.1500016delete
delete原文链接
delete原文求助
delete分享
delete收藏
摘要

摘要

En 中文
Introduction: In 2010, the Ottawa Conference produced a set of consensus criteria for good assessment. These were well received and since then the working group monitored their use. As part of the 2010 report, it was recommended that consideration be given in the future to preparing similar criteria for systems of assessment. Recent developments in the field suggest that it would be timely to undertake that task and so the working group was reconvened, with changes in membership to reflect broad global representation.Methods: Consideration was given to whether the initially proposed criteria continued to be appropriate for single assessments and the group believed that they were. Consequently, we reiterate the criteria that apply to individual assessments and duplicate relevant portions of the 2010 report.Results and discussion: This paper also presents a new set of criteria that apply to systems of assessment and, recognizing the challenges of implementation, offers several issues for further consideration. Among these issues are the increasing diversity of candidates and programs, the importance of legal defensibility in high stakes assessments, globalization and the interest in portable recognition of medical training, and the interest among employers and patients in how medical education is delivered and how progression decisions are made.
Keyword:
RECOMMENDATIONS
STATEMENT
AI总结

AI总结

对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取,主要内容包括:简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。

期刊

M
Medical Teacher
IF:
4.4
论文数:
6.6K
被引数:
1.4W

机构

U
University of Calgary
学者数:
3.8W
论文数: 3.3W
被引数: 52
U
universidade do minho
学者数:
1.1W
论文数: 1.1W
被引数: 10
U
universidade cidade de sao paulo
学者数:
557
论文数: 420
被引数: 0
P
Parnassia Psychiatric Institute
学者数:
519
论文数: 474
被引数: 3
U
University of Tasmania
学者数:
1.3W
论文数: 1.3W
被引数: 1.8W
U
University of Cape Town
学者数:
1.8W
论文数: 1.6W
被引数: 31
U
university of leeds
学者数:
3.6W
论文数: 3.3W
被引数: 45
U
universidade de sao paulo
学者数:
10.6W
论文数: 6.7W
被引数: 93
学者 查看更多机构
引用论文

引用论文

Twelve Tips for programmatic assessment
err2014-11-20
err207
PREAI
errvan der Vleuten, C. P. M.; Schuwirth, L. W. T.; Driessen, E. W.; Govaerts, M. J. B.; Heeneman, S.
err分享
err收藏
Criteria for good assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference
err2011-02-23
err365
errOAAI
errNorcini, John; Anderson, Brownell; Bollela, Valdes; Burch, Vanessa; Costa, Manuel Joao; Duvivier, Robbert; Galbraith, Robert; Hays, Richard; Kent, Athol; Perrott, Vanessa; Roberts, Trudie
err分享
err收藏
Assessment for selection for the health care professions and specialty training: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference
err2011-02-23
err178
PREAI
errPrideaux, David; Roberts, Chris; Eva, Kevin; Centeno, Angel; Mccrorie, Peter; Mcmanus, Chris; Patterson, Fiona; Powis, David; Tekian, Ara; Wilkinson, David
err分享
err收藏
Developing the role of big data and analytics in health professional education
err2014-02-03
err121
PREAI
errEllaway, Rachel H.; Pusic, Martin V.; Galbraith, Robert M.; Cameron, Terri
err分享
err收藏
err分享
err收藏
err分享
err收藏
学者 查看更多内容