Is Objective Structured Practical Examination a Better Option than Conventional Practical Examination in Assessing...

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Assessment Methods

Background:

• Conventional Practical Examinations (CPE) lack objectivity and reliability, risking teacher bias.
• Objective Structured Practical Examinations (OSPE) offer a more objective, reliable, and valid assessment approach.
• Learning is often assessment-driven, highlighting the need for improved evaluation methods.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the effectiveness of OSPE compared to CPE in seventh-semester medical students.
• To assess the objectivity of structured questions across different OSPE stations.

Main Methods:

• 207 seventh-semester medical students participated in community medicine examinations.
• Students underwent both OSPE stations and conventional viva voce assessments.
• Paired T-test and ANOVA were used to analyze score differences and station objectivity.

Main Results:

• High-scoring students achieved significantly higher marks in OSPE (30.30 ± 3.94) versus CPE (26.93 ± 3.85).
• OSPE station performance showed no significant difference for high-scorers, except in one station.
• Statistically significant differences in mean marks were observed among various OSPE stations for low-scorers.

Conclusions:

• OSPE demonstrates greater effectiveness as an assessment tool compared to CPE.
• Meticulous design of OSPEs is essential for accurate evaluation.
• Proper training for assessors is necessary to mitigate potential biases in OSPEs.