Testing anatomy: Dissecting spatial and non-spatial knowledge in multiple-choice question assessment

IF 5.2 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Julie Dickson, Darren J. Shaw, Andrew Gardiner, Susan Rhind
{"title":"Testing anatomy: Dissecting spatial and non-spatial knowledge in multiple-choice question assessment","authors":"Julie Dickson,&nbsp;Darren J. Shaw,&nbsp;Andrew Gardiner,&nbsp;Susan Rhind","doi":"10.1002/ase.2323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Limited research has been conducted on the spatial ability of veterinary students and how this is evaluated within anatomy assessments. This study describes the creation and evaluation of a split design multiple-choice question (MCQ) assessment (totaling 30 questions divided into 15 non-spatial MCQs and 15 spatial MCQs). Two cohorts were tested, one cohort received a 2D teaching method in the academic year 2014/15 (male = 15/108, female 93/108), and the second a 3D teaching method in the academic year 2015/16 (male 14/98, female 84/98). The evaluation of the MCQ demonstrated strong reliability (KR-20 = 0.71 2D and 0.63 3D) meaning the MCQ consistently tests the same construct. Factor analysis of the MCQ provides evidence of validity of the split design of the assessment (RR = 1.11, <i>p</i> = 0.013). Neither cohort outperformed on the non-spatial questions (<i>p</i> &gt; 0.05), however, the 3D cohort performed statistically significantly higher on the spatial questions (<i>p</i> = 0.013). The results of this research support the design of a new anatomy assessment aimed at testing both anatomy knowledge and the problem-solving aspects of anatomical spatial ability. Furthermore, a 3D teaching method was shown to increase students' performance on anatomy questions testing spatial ability.</p>","PeriodicalId":124,"journal":{"name":"Anatomical Sciences Education","volume":"17 1","pages":"102-113"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ase.2323","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatomical Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ase.2323","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Limited research has been conducted on the spatial ability of veterinary students and how this is evaluated within anatomy assessments. This study describes the creation and evaluation of a split design multiple-choice question (MCQ) assessment (totaling 30 questions divided into 15 non-spatial MCQs and 15 spatial MCQs). Two cohorts were tested, one cohort received a 2D teaching method in the academic year 2014/15 (male = 15/108, female 93/108), and the second a 3D teaching method in the academic year 2015/16 (male 14/98, female 84/98). The evaluation of the MCQ demonstrated strong reliability (KR-20 = 0.71 2D and 0.63 3D) meaning the MCQ consistently tests the same construct. Factor analysis of the MCQ provides evidence of validity of the split design of the assessment (RR = 1.11, p = 0.013). Neither cohort outperformed on the non-spatial questions (p > 0.05), however, the 3D cohort performed statistically significantly higher on the spatial questions (p = 0.013). The results of this research support the design of a new anatomy assessment aimed at testing both anatomy knowledge and the problem-solving aspects of anatomical spatial ability. Furthermore, a 3D teaching method was shown to increase students' performance on anatomy questions testing spatial ability.

Abstract Image

测试解剖学:剖析选择题评估中的空间和非空间知识。
关于兽医专业学生的空间能力以及如何在解剖学评估中对其进行评价的研究十分有限。本研究介绍了对分层设计的多选题(MCQ)评估(共 30 道题,分为 15 道非空间 MCQ 和 15 道空间 MCQ)的创建和评估。两批学生接受了测试,其中一批学生在2014/15学年接受了二维教学法(男生=15/108,女生93/108),第二批学生在2015/16学年接受了三维教学法(男生14/98,女生84/98)。对 MCQ 的评估显示出很强的可靠性(KR-20 = 0.71 2D 和 0.63 3D ),这意味着 MCQ 始终测试相同的建构。对 MCQ 进行的因子分析证明了拆分设计评估的有效性(RR = 1.11,p = 0.013)。两组学生在非空间问题上的表现都不理想(p > 0.05),但三维学生在空间问题上的表现明显高于其他学生(p = 0.013)。这项研究结果支持设计一种新的解剖学评估,旨在测试解剖学知识和解剖学空间能力的问题解决方面。此外,一种三维教学方法被证明能提高学生在测试空间能力的解剖学问题上的成绩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anatomical Sciences Education
Anatomical Sciences Education Anatomy/education-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
39.70%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Anatomical Sciences Education, affiliated with the American Association for Anatomy, serves as an international platform for sharing ideas, innovations, and research related to education in anatomical sciences. Covering gross anatomy, embryology, histology, and neurosciences, the journal addresses education at various levels, including undergraduate, graduate, post-graduate, allied health, medical (both allopathic and osteopathic), and dental. It fosters collaboration and discussion in the field of anatomical sciences education.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信