Validity of the Intraining Examinations and the Board Examinations -An Experience in the Korean Society of Otolaryngology.
- Author:
Sea Yuong JEON
1
;
Myung Hyun CHUNG
;
Kwang Hyun KIM
;
Won Pyo HONG
Author Information
1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology, College of Medicine, GyeongSang National University, Chinju, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Intraining examination;
Board examination;
Personal progress index;
Constructive validity;
Predictive validity;
Concurrent validity
- MeSH:
Diagnosis, Oral;
Humans;
Linear Models;
Otolaryngology*;
Specialization
- From:Korean Journal of Medical Education
1997;9(2):151-157
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
The korean society of otolaryngology has had and experience on intraining examination since 1992. We also had the fortieth annual board examination for specialist in 1997. But we have no evidence on the validity of these tests yet. The aim of this study is to examine the validity of the intraining examinations as a tool of formative evaluation, to present a personal progress index demonstrating constructive validity, and to examine the validity of the board examination as a tool of summative evaluation. We did statistic analysis on the consecutive personal scores of 1995 and 1996 intraining examinations, and 1997 written and oral board examinations. Analysis of the averages, standard deviations, distribution curves, and Wilcoxon singed rank test on the scores of 1995 and 1996 intraining examinations demonstrated the constructive validity. Chi-square test revealed that those who had low scores in intraining examinations of two consecutive years had low scores in 1997 board examinations and personal progress index demonstrated the predictive validity. Correlation and linear regression analysis demonstrated a strong correlation between 1997 written and oral board examination. Analysis of the averages, standard deviations, distribution curves, and Spearman rank correlation coefficient revealed that 1997 written board examination had higher concurrent validity than the that of oral examination.
