[A comparison of different methods of performance assessment for the course in general medicine]

A novel Federal Regulation for Basic Medical Education was issued in Germany, which requires an end of course assessment. General Practice (GP) in Duesseldorf has introduced a written examination. An accompanying study was carried out to understand whether different methods of performance evaluation would show equivalent results intraindividually. Out of the GP class 21 students were randomised to undergo an oral examination on top of the regular written examination. Furthermore their teaching practitioners have appraised these students performance in small group teaching. Finally, the students have been rated following a practical term. At the end the students have been interviewed in a focus group to investigate their preferred method of assessment. The survey of the average grades showed comparable results for the written test, the oral examination and small group teaching while the appraisal at the end of the practical term happened to be significantly higher in grade. The comparison of the individual results, however, showed a statistical spreading in all directions. For example, a poor performance in the written test can come along with excellent results in the oral examination and vice versa. The intra-class correlation across all classes has been as low as 0.1. These results support the conclusion that apparently each method can appropriately evaluate only a very specific part of the complex contents of the GP education and of students' performance. In order to properly examine the performance of GP students a combination of different evaluation methods needs to be applied. As an alternative, different skills can be examined in different practical and theoretical test situations in an OSCE.