Structured Oral Examination as an Effective Assessment Tool in Lab-Based Physiology Learning Sessions

• Published in: Advances in physiology education 2020-09, Vol.44 (3), p.453-458
• Main Authors: Wang, Lifeng, Khalaf, Ahmad Taha, Lei, Dongyu, Gale, Mengke, Li, Jing, Jiang, Ping, Du, Jing, Yinayeti, Xuehereti, Abudureheman, Mayinuer, Wei, Yuanyuan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Academic Achievement; Educational evaluation; Evaluation Methods; Foreign Countries; Interrater Reliability; Laboratories; Learning; Likert Scales; Medical education; Medical Students; Oral Language; Physiology; Science Laboratories; Self Efficacy; Standardization; Student Attitudes; Student Evaluation; Studies; Verbal Tests
• ISSN: 1043-4046; 1522-1229
• DOI: 10.1152/advan.00059.2020

Traditional oral examination (TOE) is criticized for the shortage of objectivity, standardization, and reliability. These perceived limitations can be mitigated by the introduction of structured oral examination (SOE). There is little evidence of the implementation of SOE in physiology laboratory courses. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of SOE in laboratory-based learning sessions. Second-year medical students (n = 114) attended a 16-wk physiology laboratory course. They were initially assessed by TOE in the middle of the academic term. The students' perspectives on this assessment were measured by a modified three-point Likert-type scale questionnaire. Following this, faculty members prepared topics for SOE; nine topics were included from each laboratory course. The correct answers and scoring criteria were discussed among the faculty before the SOE event. One week after the last laboratory course, SOE was carried out for each student. As with the TOE process, student feedback was collected via a modified three-point Likert-type scale questionnaire. The mean laboratory homework score from the first four and last four laboratory courses was also calculated. Paper exams were also conducted after TOE and SOE. The results show that SOE is more acceptable to students than TOE. Significant differences (P < 0.05) were observed in terms of uniformity of questions asked, syllabus coverage, and anxiety levels. In addition, SOE improved students' performance in the laboratory course explored here. We contend that SOE shows promise as an effective assessment tool in laboratory-based physiology learning sessions.