Expert validation of fit-for-purpose guidelines for designing programmes of assessment

dc.creator	Dijkstra Joost
dc.creator	Galbraith Robert
dc.creator	Hodges Brian D
dc.creator	McAvoy Pauline A
dc.creator	McCrorie Peter
dc.creator	Southgate Lesley J
dc.creator	Van der Vleuten Cees PM
dc.creator	Wass Val
dc.creator	Schuwirth Lambert WT
dc.date	2012-04-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-07-20T22:07:47Z
dc.date.available	2015-07-20T22:07:47Z
dc.identifier	10.1186/1472-6920-12-20
dc.identifier	1472-6920
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/f2d15cdaa15245faa812858801f416ce
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/11487
dc.identifier.uri	https://doaj.org/article/f2d15cdaa15245faa812858801f416ce
dc.description	<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>An assessment programme, a purposeful mix of assessment activities, is necessary to achieve a complete picture of assessee competence. High quality assessment programmes exist, however, design requirements for such programmes are still unclear. We developed guidelines for design based on an earlier developed framework which identified areas to be covered. A fitness-for-purpose approach defining quality was adopted to develop and validate guidelines.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>First, in a brainstorm, ideas were generated, followed by structured interviews with 9 international assessment experts. Then, guidelines were fine-tuned through analysis of the interviews. Finally, validation was based on expert consensus via member checking.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In total 72 guidelines were developed and in this paper the most salient guidelines are discussed. The guidelines are related and grouped per layer of the framework. Some guidelines were so generic that these are applicable in any design consideration. These are: the principle of proportionality, rationales should underpin each decisions, and requirement of expertise. Logically, many guidelines focus on practical aspects of assessment. Some guidelines were found to be clear and concrete, others were less straightforward and were phrased more as issues for contemplation.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The set of guidelines is comprehensive and not bound to a specific context or educational approach. From the fitness-for-purpose principle, guidelines are eclectic, requiring expertise judgement to use them appropriately in different contexts. Further validation studies to test practicality are required.</p>
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	BioMed Central
dc.relation	http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/12/20
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1472-6920
dc.rights	CC BY
dc.source	BMC Medical Education, Vol 12, Iss 1, p 20 (2012)
dc.subject	Medicine (General)
dc.subject	R5-920
dc.subject	Medicine
dc.subject	R
dc.subject	DOAJ:Medicine (General)
dc.subject	DOAJ:Health Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Medicine (General)
dc.subject	R5-920
dc.subject	Medicine
dc.subject	R
dc.subject	DOAJ:Medicine (General)
dc.subject	DOAJ:Health Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Medicine (General)
dc.subject	R5-920
dc.subject	Medicine
dc.subject	R
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Medicine (General)
dc.subject	R5-920
dc.subject	Medicine
dc.subject	R
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Medicine (General)
dc.subject	R5-920
dc.subject	Medicine
dc.subject	R
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.title	Expert validation of fit-for-purpose guidelines for designing programmes of assessment
dc.type	Article