File
Korkie E1, Lubbe I2
1University of Pretoria, Physiotherapy, Pretoria, South Africa, 2University of Pretoria, Education Innovation, Pretoria, South Africa
Background: Why do we assess students? From a student's perspective the answer can be to obtain marks and to pass a module and exam. From the lecturer's perspective it can be to test a specific skill or to determine the level of preparedness to continue with the curriculum. As learning should be authentic, so should assessment be. For the twenty first century learner, authentic assessment should reflect real world situations, case studies should range from easy to more complex to allow students to find their own solutions and to role play to find their own identity. Currently second year students' ability to apply a technique is evaluated in an Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) format. Students have eight minutes to demonstrate the required technique on a fellow student.
Purpose: It was noticed that due to the time limitation only the ability to demonstrate a technique is assessed and often the ability to integrate knowledge and to adapt the technique to treat a patient are lacking. In the OSCE setting a fixed memorandum is used to ensure evaluator objectivity, but hereby the student is limited by the ability of the fellow student to fit the case scenario.
Methods: A video essay assignment replaced the specific section in an OSCE examination. For the assignment the student had to identify a patient with lower limb pain (scope of OSCE exam). The patient was interviewed and consent was obtained. The patient was evaluated and the source of the pain was identified. One muscle was identified and strengthened according to the patient's ability. The interview, evaluation of the muscle strength and the strengthening exercise were video-taped, none exceeding ten minutes. After the assignment a reflexion form was completed.
Results: The similarities between an OSCE and the video essay were the time limitation per technique and the scope of the work. The uniqueness of this approach is demonstrated in the differences between a video essay and an OSCE. Firstly, the assessment and application of techniques were patient specific. Secondly, students could practice the technique until they felt confident to perform the specific technique. Thirdly, the application of the treatment required the student to adapt to the real life environment of the patient. Fourthly, the student was challenged to be creative. Lastly, feedback was given where the student and lecturer watched the video together. Feedback and remediation took place and questions from the student side could be addressed.
Conclusion(s): Marks were compared to previous years and the outcome was better. In the student reflexion words like 'applicable', 'no pressure', 'challenging' and 'practical applicable' were used.
Implications: Four of the main aspects, cognitive-, interpersonal-, technical- and intrapersonal skills, of the 21st century learner were addressed. The stress levels of students were less and time restriction was eliminated. This was replaced by a sense of victory and allowing each student their individual approach and creativity. The end result - assessment resulted in achievement!
Keywords: Video-essay, Twenty first century learner, alternative assessment
Funding acknowledgements: No funding was used
Purpose: It was noticed that due to the time limitation only the ability to demonstrate a technique is assessed and often the ability to integrate knowledge and to adapt the technique to treat a patient are lacking. In the OSCE setting a fixed memorandum is used to ensure evaluator objectivity, but hereby the student is limited by the ability of the fellow student to fit the case scenario.
Methods: A video essay assignment replaced the specific section in an OSCE examination. For the assignment the student had to identify a patient with lower limb pain (scope of OSCE exam). The patient was interviewed and consent was obtained. The patient was evaluated and the source of the pain was identified. One muscle was identified and strengthened according to the patient's ability. The interview, evaluation of the muscle strength and the strengthening exercise were video-taped, none exceeding ten minutes. After the assignment a reflexion form was completed.
Results: The similarities between an OSCE and the video essay were the time limitation per technique and the scope of the work. The uniqueness of this approach is demonstrated in the differences between a video essay and an OSCE. Firstly, the assessment and application of techniques were patient specific. Secondly, students could practice the technique until they felt confident to perform the specific technique. Thirdly, the application of the treatment required the student to adapt to the real life environment of the patient. Fourthly, the student was challenged to be creative. Lastly, feedback was given where the student and lecturer watched the video together. Feedback and remediation took place and questions from the student side could be addressed.
Conclusion(s): Marks were compared to previous years and the outcome was better. In the student reflexion words like 'applicable', 'no pressure', 'challenging' and 'practical applicable' were used.
Implications: Four of the main aspects, cognitive-, interpersonal-, technical- and intrapersonal skills, of the 21st century learner were addressed. The stress levels of students were less and time restriction was eliminated. This was replaced by a sense of victory and allowing each student their individual approach and creativity. The end result - assessment resulted in achievement!
Keywords: Video-essay, Twenty first century learner, alternative assessment
Funding acknowledgements: No funding was used
Topic: Education; Education
Ethics approval required: No
Institution: University of Pretoria
Ethics committee: Faculty of Health Sciences Research and Ethical Committee
Reason not required: The essay was given as part of the teaching program. When reflected on the outcome and the feedback of the students the value of the assignment was noticed. After a discussion with the Ethics Department reporting on the project did not need ethical approval.
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
