Loading…
Opening the black box of selection
Medical school selection is currently in the paradoxical situation in which selection tools may predict study outcomes, but which constructs are actually doing the predicting is unknown (the ‘black box of selection’). Therefore, our research focused on those constructs, answering the question: do th...
Saved in:
Published in: | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice 2020-05, Vol.25 (2), p.363-382 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43 |
container_end_page | 382 |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 363 |
container_title | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice |
container_volume | 25 |
creator | Schreurs, Sanne Cleutjens, Kitty Collares, Carlos F. Cleland, Jennifer oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A. |
description | Medical school selection is currently in the paradoxical situation in which selection tools may predict study outcomes, but which constructs are actually doing the predicting is unknown (the ‘black box of selection’). Therefore, our research focused on those constructs, answering the question: do the internal structures of the tests in an outcome-based selection procedure reflect the content that was intended to be measured? Downing’s validity framework was applied to organize evidence for construct validity, focusing on evidence related to content and internal structure. The applied selection procedure was a multi-tool, CanMEDS-based procedure comprised of a video-based situational judgement test (focused on (inter)personal competencies), and a written aptitude test (reflecting a broader array of CanMEDS competencies). First, we examined content-related evidence pertaining to the creation and application of the competency-based selection blueprint and found that the set-up of the selection procedure was a robust, transparent and replicable process. Second, the internal structure of the selection tests was investigated by connecting applicants’ performance on the selection tests to the predetermined blueprint using cognitive diagnostic modeling. The data indicate 89% overlap between the expected and measured constructs. Our results support the notion that the focus placed on creating the right content and following a competency-blueprint was effective in terms of internal structure: most items measured what they were intended to measure. This way of linking a predetermined blueprint to the applicants’ results sheds light into the ‘black box of selection’ and can be used to support the construct validity of selection procedures. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10459-019-09925-1 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7210244</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1252976</ericid><sourcerecordid>2303745841</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi1ERUvhD1RqFcGFS6jH375UQlWBokq9lLPlOJNt2my82FlE_329pGw_DhwsW3qfeT0zLyEHQD8Dpfo4AxXS1hTKsZbJGl6RPZCa16C0fl3e3LBaWKt2yducbyilHIx5Q3Y5SGuM4Xvkw-UKx35cVNM1Vs3gw23VxD9V7KqMA4apj-M7stP5IeP7h3uf_Px6dnX6vb64_HZ--uWiDsKqqQaqkFGrhAGNHKhF1bVG-sYL32LHGIVGBUDFGWs7boTwATtJg1SdaIPg--Rk9l2tmyW2Accp-cGtUr_06c5F37vnythfu0X87TQDysTG4NODQYq_1pgnt-xzwGHwI8Z1doxTroU0Agr68QV6E9dpLOM5JsqepJZyQ7GZCinmnLDbNgPUbSJwcwSuROD-RuA2RUdPx9iW_Nt5AQ5nAFMftvLZD2CSWa2Kzmc9F21cYHrs7T_f3gP_QJmH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2400057551</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Opening the black box of selection</title><source>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Springer Link</source><source>ERIC</source><creator>Schreurs, Sanne ; Cleutjens, Kitty ; Collares, Carlos F. ; Cleland, Jennifer ; oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schreurs, Sanne ; Cleutjens, Kitty ; Collares, Carlos F. ; Cleland, Jennifer ; oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</creatorcontrib><description>Medical school selection is currently in the paradoxical situation in which selection tools may predict study outcomes, but which constructs are actually doing the predicting is unknown (the ‘black box of selection’). Therefore, our research focused on those constructs, answering the question: do the internal structures of the tests in an outcome-based selection procedure reflect the content that was intended to be measured? Downing’s validity framework was applied to organize evidence for construct validity, focusing on evidence related to content and internal structure. The applied selection procedure was a multi-tool, CanMEDS-based procedure comprised of a video-based situational judgement test (focused on (inter)personal competencies), and a written aptitude test (reflecting a broader array of CanMEDS competencies). First, we examined content-related evidence pertaining to the creation and application of the competency-based selection blueprint and found that the set-up of the selection procedure was a robust, transparent and replicable process. Second, the internal structure of the selection tests was investigated by connecting applicants’ performance on the selection tests to the predetermined blueprint using cognitive diagnostic modeling. The data indicate 89% overlap between the expected and measured constructs. Our results support the notion that the focus placed on creating the right content and following a competency-blueprint was effective in terms of internal structure: most items measured what they were intended to measure. This way of linking a predetermined blueprint to the applicants’ results sheds light into the ‘black box of selection’ and can be used to support the construct validity of selection procedures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1382-4996</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10459-019-09925-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31598883</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Aptitude Tests ; College Admission ; College Applicants ; Competence ; Construct Validity ; Decision Making ; Education ; Evidence ; Guidelines ; Life sciences ; Medical Education ; Medical Schools ; Medicine ; Prediction ; Selection Criteria ; Selection Tools ; Test Items ; Validity ; Video Technology ; Writing Tests</subject><ispartof>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2020-05, Vol.25 (2), p.363-382</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2019. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0233-9775 ; 0000-0002-5530-6598 ; 0000-0002-7870-1670 ; 0000-0003-0914-3430 ; 0000-0003-1433-9323</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2400057551?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,21378,21394,27924,27925,33611,33612,33877,33878,43733,43880</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1252976$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31598883$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schreurs, Sanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleutjens, Kitty</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collares, Carlos F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleland, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</creatorcontrib><title>Opening the black box of selection</title><title>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</title><addtitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</addtitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><description>Medical school selection is currently in the paradoxical situation in which selection tools may predict study outcomes, but which constructs are actually doing the predicting is unknown (the ‘black box of selection’). Therefore, our research focused on those constructs, answering the question: do the internal structures of the tests in an outcome-based selection procedure reflect the content that was intended to be measured? Downing’s validity framework was applied to organize evidence for construct validity, focusing on evidence related to content and internal structure. The applied selection procedure was a multi-tool, CanMEDS-based procedure comprised of a video-based situational judgement test (focused on (inter)personal competencies), and a written aptitude test (reflecting a broader array of CanMEDS competencies). First, we examined content-related evidence pertaining to the creation and application of the competency-based selection blueprint and found that the set-up of the selection procedure was a robust, transparent and replicable process. Second, the internal structure of the selection tests was investigated by connecting applicants’ performance on the selection tests to the predetermined blueprint using cognitive diagnostic modeling. The data indicate 89% overlap between the expected and measured constructs. Our results support the notion that the focus placed on creating the right content and following a competency-blueprint was effective in terms of internal structure: most items measured what they were intended to measure. This way of linking a predetermined blueprint to the applicants’ results sheds light into the ‘black box of selection’ and can be used to support the construct validity of selection procedures.</description><subject>Aptitude Tests</subject><subject>College Admission</subject><subject>College Applicants</subject><subject>Competence</subject><subject>Construct Validity</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Guidelines</subject><subject>Life sciences</subject><subject>Medical Education</subject><subject>Medical Schools</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Prediction</subject><subject>Selection Criteria</subject><subject>Selection Tools</subject><subject>Test Items</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Video Technology</subject><subject>Writing Tests</subject><issn>1382-4996</issn><issn>1573-1677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhi1ERUvhD1RqFcGFS6jH375UQlWBokq9lLPlOJNt2my82FlE_329pGw_DhwsW3qfeT0zLyEHQD8Dpfo4AxXS1hTKsZbJGl6RPZCa16C0fl3e3LBaWKt2yducbyilHIx5Q3Y5SGuM4Xvkw-UKx35cVNM1Vs3gw23VxD9V7KqMA4apj-M7stP5IeP7h3uf_Px6dnX6vb64_HZ--uWiDsKqqQaqkFGrhAGNHKhF1bVG-sYL32LHGIVGBUDFGWs7boTwATtJg1SdaIPg--Rk9l2tmyW2Accp-cGtUr_06c5F37vnythfu0X87TQDysTG4NODQYq_1pgnt-xzwGHwI8Z1doxTroU0Agr68QV6E9dpLOM5JsqepJZyQ7GZCinmnLDbNgPUbSJwcwSuROD-RuA2RUdPx9iW_Nt5AQ5nAFMftvLZD2CSWa2Kzmc9F21cYHrs7T_f3gP_QJmH</recordid><startdate>20200501</startdate><enddate>20200501</enddate><creator>Schreurs, Sanne</creator><creator>Cleutjens, Kitty</creator><creator>Collares, Carlos F.</creator><creator>Cleland, Jennifer</creator><creator>oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0233-9775</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5530-6598</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7870-1670</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0914-3430</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1433-9323</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200501</creationdate><title>Opening the black box of selection</title><author>Schreurs, Sanne ; Cleutjens, Kitty ; Collares, Carlos F. ; Cleland, Jennifer ; oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Aptitude Tests</topic><topic>College Admission</topic><topic>College Applicants</topic><topic>Competence</topic><topic>Construct Validity</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Guidelines</topic><topic>Life sciences</topic><topic>Medical Education</topic><topic>Medical Schools</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Prediction</topic><topic>Selection Criteria</topic><topic>Selection Tools</topic><topic>Test Items</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Video Technology</topic><topic>Writing Tests</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schreurs, Sanne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleutjens, Kitty</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Collares, Carlos F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cleland, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</creatorcontrib><collection>SpringerOpen</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schreurs, Sanne</au><au>Cleutjens, Kitty</au><au>Collares, Carlos F.</au><au>Cleland, Jennifer</au><au>oude Egbrink, Mirjam G. A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1252976</ericid><atitle>Opening the black box of selection</atitle><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle><stitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</stitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><date>2020-05-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>363</spage><epage>382</epage><pages>363-382</pages><issn>1382-4996</issn><eissn>1573-1677</eissn><abstract>Medical school selection is currently in the paradoxical situation in which selection tools may predict study outcomes, but which constructs are actually doing the predicting is unknown (the ‘black box of selection’). Therefore, our research focused on those constructs, answering the question: do the internal structures of the tests in an outcome-based selection procedure reflect the content that was intended to be measured? Downing’s validity framework was applied to organize evidence for construct validity, focusing on evidence related to content and internal structure. The applied selection procedure was a multi-tool, CanMEDS-based procedure comprised of a video-based situational judgement test (focused on (inter)personal competencies), and a written aptitude test (reflecting a broader array of CanMEDS competencies). First, we examined content-related evidence pertaining to the creation and application of the competency-based selection blueprint and found that the set-up of the selection procedure was a robust, transparent and replicable process. Second, the internal structure of the selection tests was investigated by connecting applicants’ performance on the selection tests to the predetermined blueprint using cognitive diagnostic modeling. The data indicate 89% overlap between the expected and measured constructs. Our results support the notion that the focus placed on creating the right content and following a competency-blueprint was effective in terms of internal structure: most items measured what they were intended to measure. This way of linking a predetermined blueprint to the applicants’ results sheds light into the ‘black box of selection’ and can be used to support the construct validity of selection procedures.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>31598883</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10459-019-09925-1</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0233-9775</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5530-6598</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7870-1670</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0914-3430</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1433-9323</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1382-4996 |
ispartof | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2020-05, Vol.25 (2), p.363-382 |
issn | 1382-4996 1573-1677 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7210244 |
source | Education Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Springer Link; ERIC |
subjects | Aptitude Tests College Admission College Applicants Competence Construct Validity Decision Making Education Evidence Guidelines Life sciences Medical Education Medical Schools Medicine Prediction Selection Criteria Selection Tools Test Items Validity Video Technology Writing Tests |
title | Opening the black box of selection |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T16%3A19%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Opening%20the%20black%20box%20of%20selection&rft.jtitle=Advances%20in%20health%20sciences%20education%20:%20theory%20and%20practice&rft.au=Schreurs,%20Sanne&rft.date=2020-05-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=363&rft.epage=382&rft.pages=363-382&rft.issn=1382-4996&rft.eissn=1573-1677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10459-019-09925-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2303745841%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-106e20964817e3109e6fd85aba4adef2201b6c1e6322df3844acef50c56f4dc43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2400057551&rft_id=info:pmid/31598883&rft_ericid=EJ1252976&rfr_iscdi=true |