Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Abstract

Background: Evaluation is an essential component of training of oral health professionals and development and modification of evaluation methods in dental education seem necessary. The present study aimed to compare two evaluation methods in practical oral pathology.
Methods: This cross-sectional, comparative study was conducted in Shiraz School of Dentistry in 2013. The study participants included 110 junior dental students (55 cases and 55 controls) who were evaluated in oral pathology. The data were analyzed by independent samples t-test and chi-square test using the SPSS statistical software, version 17.
Results: The results showed that the mean score of practical pathology was higher in the group evaluated by the new method compared to that assessed using the traditional approach (t=2.041, p=0.003).
Conclusion: Based on the results, the designed evaluation method was a proper tool to assess students’ ability in practical oral pathology. Thus, oral pathology professors are recommended to apply this tool. Yet, further studies should be conducted to determine the reason for effectiveness of this method.

Keywords

1. Amin Z, Eng KH. Basics in medical education. 3rd ed. Singapore. World Scientific Publishing Co; 2009.
2. Saboori A, VahidDastjerdi E, Mahdian M,Kharrazifard MJ. Dental residents’ perceptions of OSCE as a clinical evaluation method. Journal of Dental School 2010; 28 (2): 88-94. [Persian]
3. ElBadrawy H, Korayem M. The flexible requirement system for grading of clinical performance of undergraduate dental students. Journal of Dental Education2007; 11(3):208-215.
4. Safura B, QamaruzZaman J. Point-Based System in Clinical Assessment of Operative Dentistry Course. Social& Behavior Science 2011; 18: 128–33.
5. Brand HS, Schoonheim-Klein M. Is the OSCE more stressful? Examination anxiety and its consequences indifferent assessment methods in dental education. Journal of Dental Education 2009; 13(3): 147-53.
6.Yip HK, Smales RJ, Newsome PRH, Chu FCS, Chow TW. Competency-based education in a clinical course in conservative dentistry. British Dental Journal 2001; 191(9): 517-22.
7.Youngson CC, Molyneux LE, Fox K, Boyle EL, Preston AJ. Undergraduate requirements in restorative dentistry in the UK and Ireland. British Dental Journal 2007; 203(5): 9-14.
8. Kramer GA, Albino JEN, Andrieu SC, Hendricson WD, Henson L, Horn BD, et al. Dental Student Assessment Toolbox. Journal of Dental Education2009; 73(1):12-33.
9.Albino JEN, Young SK, Neumann LM, Kramer GA, Andrieu SC, Henson L, et al. Assessing dental students’ competence: best practice recommendations in the performance assessment literature and investigation of current practices in predoctoral dental education. Journal of Dental Education 2008; 72(12): 1405–35.
10. Krutchkoff DDS. Evaluation of student competence in oral pathology and clinical diagnosis: An alternative method of testing. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology1980; 50(2): 160–3.
11. Faryabi J. Farzad M. Sinaie N. [University students’ point of view about clinical evaluation using OSCE, Kerman
School of Dentistry]. Journal of Strides in Development of Medical Education 2009; 6(1): 34-39. [Persian]
12. O’Sullivan D, Hooper S, McNally L, Jagger D. The introduction of a new assessment system in restorative dentistry: the undergraduate and patient experience. Journal of Dental Education 2007; 11(1): 54-59.
13. Brown G, Bull J, Pendlebury M. Assessing student learning in higher education. London: Rout ledge; 1997.
14. Newble DI, Jaeger K. The effects of assessment and examinations on the learning of medical students. Journal of Medical Education 1983; 17(3):25–31.