Advertisement

Advances in Health Sciences Education

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 341–357 | Cite as

Validation of a performance assessment instrument in problem-based learning tutorials using two cohorts of medical students

  • Ming LeeEmail author
  • Paul F. Wimmers
Article

Abstract

Although problem-based learning (PBL) has been widely used in medical schools, few studies have attended to the assessment of PBL processes using validated instruments. This study examined reliability and validity for an instrument assessing PBL performance in four domains: Problem Solving, Use of Information, Group Process, and Professionalism. Two cohorts of medical students (N = 310) participated in the study, with 2 years of PBL evaluation data extracted from archive rated by a total of 158 faculty raters. Analyses based on generalizability theory were conducted for reliability examination. Validity was examined through following the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing to evaluate content validity, response processes, construct validity, predictive validity, and the relationship to the variable of training. For construct validity, correlations of PBL scores with six other outcome measures were examined, including Medical College Admission Test, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Comprehensive Basic Science Examination, NBME Comprehensive Clinical Science Examination, Clinical Performance Examination, and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge. Predictive validity was examined by using PBL scores to predict five medical school outcomes. The highest percentage of PBL total score variance was associated with students (60 %), indicating students in the study differed in their PBL performance. The generalizability and dependability coefficients were moderately high (Ep2 = .68, ϕ = .60), showing the instrument is reliable for ranking students and identifying competent PBL performers. The patterns of correlations between PBL domain scores and the outcome measures partially support construct validity. PBL performance ratings as a whole significantly (p < .01) predicted all the major medical school achievements. The second year PBL scores were significantly higher than those of the first year, indicating a training effect. Psychometric findings provided support for reliability and many aspects of validity of PBL performance assessment using the instrument.

Keywords

PBL assessment Psychometric validation Generalizability theory Reliability and validity Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing Medical Education, Undergraduate 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Noreen Webb, Professor of Education at UCLA Graduate School of Education, for her review and valuable suggestions for improvement to the manuscript.

References

  1. Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68, 52–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  3. Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centered learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5, 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrows, H. S. (1986). A taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berkson, I. (1993). Problem-based learning: Have the expectations been met? Academic Medicine, 68, S79–S88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Blumberg, P. (2005). Assessing students during the problem-based learning (PBL) process. Journal of the International Association of Medical Science Educators, 15, 1–9. http://www.iamse.org/artman/publish/article_289.shtml. Accessed 11 April 2014.
  8. Bowerman, B. L., & O’Connell, R. T. (1990). Linear statistical models: An applied approach (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Duxbury.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. Colliver, J. A. (2000). Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Research and theory. Academic Medicine, 75, 259–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crick, J. E., & Brennan, R. L. (1983). Manual for GENOVA: A generalized analysis of variance system. Iowa City, IA: The American College Testing Program.Google Scholar
  12. Distlehorst, L. H., Dawson, E., Robbs, R. S., & Barrows, H. S. (2005). Problem-based learning outcomes: The glass half-full. Academic Medicine, 80, 294–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dolmans, D., & Gijbels, D. (2013). Research on problem-based learning: Future challenges. Medical Education, 47, 214–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dolmans, D., Gijselaers, W. H., Moust, J. H. C., de Grave, W. S., Wolfhagen, H. A. P., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2002). Trends in research on the tutor in PBL: Conclusions and implications for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 24, 173–180.Google Scholar
  15. Elizondo-Montemayor, L. L. (2004). Formative and summative assessment of the problem-based learning tutorial session using a criterion-referenced system. Journal of the International Association of Medical Science Educators, 14, 8–14.Google Scholar
  16. Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75, 27–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gijbels, D., van den Bossche, P., & Loyens, S. (2012). Student achievement in problem-based learning. In J. A. C. Hattie & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (pp. 382–384). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hak, T., & Maguire, P. (2000). Group process: The black box of studies on problem-based learning. Academic Medicine, 75, 769–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hébert, R., & Bravo, G. (1996). Development and validation of an evaluation instrument for medical students in tutorials. Academic Medicine, 71, 488–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kilroy, D. A. (2004). Problem based learning. Emergency Medicine Journal, 21, 411–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kinkade, S. (2005). A snapshot of the status of problem-based learning in US medical schools, 2003–2004. Academic Medicine, 80, 300–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koenig, J. A., Sireci, S. G., & Wiley, A. (1998). Evaluating the predictive validity of MCAT scores across diverse applicant groups. Academic Medicine, 73, 1095–1106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  24. Menard, S. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis. Sage university paper series on quantitative applications in the social sciences, 07-106. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Myers, R. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Duxbury.Google Scholar
  26. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability in learning strategies and students’ perceptions of the learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 18, 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 73, 1068–1071.Google Scholar
  28. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (2000). Effectiveness of problem-based learning curricula: Theory, practice and paper darts. Medical Education, 34, 721–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Painvin, C., Neufeld, V., Norman, G., Walker, I., & Wheelan, G. (1979). The “triple jump” exercise—A structured measure of problem solving and self-directed learning. Annual Conference on Research in Medical Education. Conference Proceedings, 18, 73–77.Google Scholar
  30. Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. J. (2011). The process of [problem-based learning: What works and why. Medical Education, 45, 792–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shavelson, R. J., Baxter, G. P., & Gao, X. (1993). Sampling variability of performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shavelson, R. J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Wiley, E. W. (1999). Note on sources of sampling variability in science performance assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 61–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shavelson, R. J., & Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability theory: A primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Sim, S., Azila, N. M. A., Lian, L., Tan, C. P. L., & Tan, N. (2006). A simple instrument for the assessment of student performance in problem-based learning tutorials. Annals Academy of Medicine Singapore, 35, 634–641.Google Scholar
  35. Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning, 3, 44–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tavares, W., & Eva, K. W. (2013). Exploring the impact of mental workload on rater-based assessments. Advances in Health Science Education, 18, 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ten Cate, T. J., Kusurkar, R. A., & Williams, G. C. (2011). How self-determination theory can assist our understanding of the teaching and learning processes in medical education. AMEE Guide No. 59. Medical Teacher, 33, 961–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Valle, R., Petra, I., Martinez-Gonzalez, A., Rojas-Ramirez, J., Morales-Lopez, S., & Pina-Garza, B. (1999). Assessment of student performance in problem-based learning tutorial sessions. Medical Education, 33, 818–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vernon, D. T. A., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68, 550–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Walker, A., & Leary, H. (2009). A problem-based learning meta-analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning, 3, 12–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Webb, N. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Haertel, E. H. (2006). Reliability coefficients and generalizability theory. Handbook of Statistics, 26, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Williams, R., Klamen, D., & McGaghie, W. (2003). Cognitive, social and environmental sources of bias in clinical performance ratings. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 15, 270–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wimmers, P. F., & Lee, M. (2015). Identifying longitudinal growth trajectories of learning domains in problem-based learning: A latent growth curve modeling approach using SEM. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 20, 467–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Educational Development and ResearchDavid Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations