Implementation of Standard-setting in the Assessment of Examinations in a Postgraduate Medical College: Fundamental Concepts and Emerging Challenges
Year: 2025
Type: article
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Different standard-setting methods have specific implementation guidelines, and fundamental concepts that cut across the different methods. However, challenges reported to be associated with these concepts may result in dispute regarding the validity and defensibility of the method and results if ignored. This study assessed the knowledge of the concepts that are fundamental to implementing the standard-setting methods approved by the college senate, the challenges encountered after 2 and a half years of implementation; and the solutions proffered by key judges. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among all the key Faculty Officers (chairmen, secretaries and third member of Senate of all 16 faculties) for the year 2024. RESULTS: Regarding the fundamental concepts, 88% knew the appropriate number and attribute-mix of judges was critical; 86% recognized training of the judges in requisite skills as core to the implementation; 90% knew the importance of the ability of judges to identify the borderline or minimally proficient candidate; and 88% knew that judging the proportion of borderline candidates who answer the items/questions correctly was central to the implementation. Challenges encountered include inadequate funds for accommodation and feeding of Court of Judges meetings (76%), inadequate number of judges (29%), inadequate training (65%), inadequate understanding of analytical versus global rating concept (63%), and inadequate understanding of the "borderline candidate" concept (53%). CONCLUSION: The majority of key judges recognized the fundamental concepts underpinning implementation of standard-setting. They overwhelmingly supported the continuity of standard-setting despite challenges encountered. Continuous training of faculty and examiners, performance descriptors of borderline candidates, and an independent examination fund to augment logistics were recommended to enhance defensibility of the methods and results.
Source: Annals of African Medicine
Language: English
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: hybrid
OpenAlex ID: W4411219519