Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding Clinical Competence: Understanding Student Assessment

  • Perspective
  • Published:
Indian Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The extent, purpose, and model of performance assessment should be guided by our understanding of clinical competence. We have come a long way from believing that competence is generic, fixed, and transferable across contents; to viewing competence as dynamic, incremental, contextual, and non-transferable. However, our pattern of assessment largely remains what it was many years ago. Contemporary educationists view competency assessment as different from traditional format. They place more emphasis on the role of expert subjective judgment, especially for performance and domain-independent competencies. Such assessments have conclusively shown their validity, reliability, and utility. They; however, require trained assessors, trust between the teachers and the taught, and above all, a political and administrative will for implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Holmboe ES, Iobst WF. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Assessment Guidebook 2020. Accessed Jan 9, 2023. Available from: https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/pdfs/milestones/guidebooks/assessmentguide book.pdf

  2. McGaghie WC, Miller GE, Sajid AW, Telder TV. Competency-based curriculum development in medical education. World Health Organization, 1978. Accessed Jan 9, 2023. Available from:https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/39703/WHO_PHP_68.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

  3. Joyce BL, Swanberg SM. Using backward design for competency-based undergraduate medical education. In: Stefaniak J, ed. Advancing Medical Education Through Strategic Instructional Design. IGI Global; 2017. p. 53–76.

  4. Leigh IW, Smith IL, Bebeau MJ, et al. Competency assessment models. Professional Psychol Res Pract. 2007;38:463–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Epstein RM, Hundert EM. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287:226–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Holmboe ES, Sherbino J, Long DM, et al. The role of assessment in competency-based medical education. Med Teach. 2010; 32: 676–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Misra K. Lessons from the Gurukul System. Rishihood Univer-sity, n.d.. Accessed Jan 9, 2023. Available from: https://rishihood.edu.in/lessons-from-the-gurukul-system/

  8. Thorndike EL. The nature, purposes, and general methods of measurements of educational products. Teach Coll Rec. 1918; 19: 16–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schuwirth LWT, van der Vleuten CPM. A history of assessment in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2020;25:1045–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hodges B. Assessment in the post-psychometric era: learning to love the subjective and collective. Med Teach. 2013; 35: 564–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Schuwirth LWT, Ash J. Assessing tomorrow’s learners: in competency-based education only a radically different holistic method of assessment will work. Six things we could forget. Med Teach. 2013;35:555–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Harden RM, Stevenson M, Downie WW, Wilson GM. Assess-ment of clinical competence using objective structured exami-nation. Br Med J. 1975;1:447–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Teoh NC, Bowden FJ. The case for resurrecting the long case. BMJ. 2008;336:1250.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Norcini JJ. The death of the long case? BMJ. 2002;324:408–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Gleeson F. AMEE medical education guide no. 9. Assessment of clinical competence using the objective structured long exami-nation record (OSLER). Med Teach. 1997;19:7–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Natriello G. The Impact of Evaluation Processes on Students. Educ Psychol. 1987;22:155–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schuwirth LWT, van der Vleuten CPM. How ‘testing’ has become ‘programmatic assessment for learning.’ Health Prof Educ. 2019;5:177–84.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Verma M, Singh T. Experiences with objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) as a tool for formative evaluation in pediatrics. Indian Pediatr. 1993;30:699–702.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lockyer J, Carraccio C, Chan MK, et al. Core principles of assess- ment in competency-based medical education. Med Teach. 2017;39:609–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. van der Vleuten CPM. The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1996;1:41–67.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Konopasek L, Norcini J, Krupat E. Focusing on the formative: building an assessment system aimed at student growth and development. Acad Med. 2016;91:1492–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Cantillon P, Sargeant J. Giving feedback in clinical settings. BMJ. 2008;337:a1961.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gupta P, Dewan P, Singh T. Objective structured clinical examination. In: Singh T, Anshu eds. Principles of Assessment in Medical Education. Jaypee Brothers, 2nd ed; 2022.

  24. Crossley J, Humphris G, Jolly B. Assessing health professionals. Med Educ. 2002;36:800–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Singh T, Saiyad S, Virk A, Kalra J, Mahajan R. Assessment tool-box for Indian medical graduate competencies. J Postgrad Med. 2021;67:80–90.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. van Lujik, van der Vleuten CPM. A comparison of checklists and ratings in performance-based testing. In: Hart IR, Harden RM, eds. Current Developments in Assessing Clinical Compe-tence. Can-Heal; 1992. pp. 357–82.

  27. Schuwirth LWT, van der Vleuten CPM. Current assessment in medical education: programmatic assessment. J Appl Test Technol. 2019;20:2–10.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kane MT. Current concerns in validity theory. J Educ Measure. 2001;38:319–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Saiyad S, Bhagat P, Virk A, Mahajan R, Singh T. Changing assessment scenarios: lessons for changing practice. Int J Appl Basic Med Res. 2021;11:206–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Mahajan R, Saiyad S, Virk A, Joshi A, Singh T. Blended programmatic assessment for competency-based curricula. J Postgrad Med. 2021;67:18–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Van Mook W, Bion J, van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT. Inte- grating education, training and assessment: competency-based intensive care medicine training. Neth J Crit Care. 2011;15:192–8.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Singh T, Shah N. Competency-based medical education and the McNamara fallacy: Assessing the important or making the assessed important? J Postgrad Med. 2023;69:35–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ginsburg S, van der Vleuten CPM, Eva KW. The hidden value of narrative comments for assessment: A quantitative reliability analysis of qualitative data. Acad Med. 2017; 92: 1617–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Cook DA, Kuper A, Hatala R, Ginsburg S. When assessment data are words: validity evidence for qualitative educational assessments. Acad Med. 2016;91:1359–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Harris P, Bhanji F, Topps M, et al. Evolving concepts of assessment in a competency-based world. Med Teach. 2017; 39: 603–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Health Professions Education, Adesh University, Bathinda, Punjab, 151101, India

    Tejinder Singh

  2. Department of Pediatrics, University College of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Piyush Gupta

  3. Department of Pediatrics, Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot, Punjab, India

    Shashi Kant Dhir

Authors
  1. Tejinder Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Piyush Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shashi Kant Dhir
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tejinder Singh.

Additional information

Contributors

TS: conceptualized the paper and prepared the first draft, PG, SKD: critically reviewed the paper; PG: revised the paper. All authors approved the final version of the submitted manuscript.

Funding

None

Competing interests

None stated.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Singh, T., Gupta, P. & Dhir, S.K. Understanding Clinical Competence: Understanding Student Assessment. Indian Pediatr 60, 267–271 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-023-2856-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13312-023-2856-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation