Training Medical Students to Create and Collaboratively Review Multiple-Choice Questions: A Comprehensive Workshop
Introduction Multiple-choice question (MCQ) creation is an infrequently used active-learning strategy. Previous studies demonstrated that medical students find value in the process, but have minimal training, which may limit potential learning benefits. We therefore developed a process for question-...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Association of American Medical Colleges
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/63f65ef0e5e64fdb98f6d00195cee365 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Introduction Multiple-choice question (MCQ) creation is an infrequently used active-learning strategy. Previous studies demonstrated that medical students find value in the process, but have minimal training, which may limit potential learning benefits. We therefore developed a process for question-creation that required students to complete in-depth training, in addition to collaborative question-writing and editing. Methods We created a question-writing workshop consisting of three components: (1) training in MCQ writing utilizing NBME online modules, a practice MCQ-writing session, and a training session, (2) writing MCQs independently after choosing topics from an institutionally generated blueprint, and (3) reviewing and editing MCQs via an in-person session. To understand students' perceptions, we held two four-student focus groups and recorded/transcribed the data. We iteratively reviewed the transcripts to generate a codebook and corresponding themes. We used the focus group data to generate a survey with Likert-scale questions, which we sent to the remaining 10 students and analyzed using Microsoft Excel. Results Eighteen second-year medical students participated in this workshop. Students perceived that question-writing training (3.7/5.0±0.5) and question writing (3.9/5.0±0.3) benefitted their learning. Students perceived that MCQ writing required concept integration (4.1/5.0±0.6). Students described how question writing allowed them to recognize subtle distinctions between therapies and diagnoses. Each MCQ required about 1.5 hours to write and collaboratively edit. Discussion Our results demonstrated that students perceived question writing to benefit their learning. More importantly, students felt that question writing actively engaged them to integrate content and compare concepts; students' engagement suggests that they learned from this question-writing activity. |
|---|