Assessment at UK medical schools varies substantially in volume, type and intensity and correlates with postgraduate attainment

Abstract

BackgroundIn the United Kingdom (UK), medical schools are free to develop local systems and policies that govern student assessment and progression. Successful completion of an undergraduate medical degree results in the automatic award of a provisional licence to practice medicine by the General Medical Council (GMC). Such a licensing process relies heavily on the assumption that individual schools develop similarly rigorous assessment policies. Little work has evaluated variability of undergraduate medical assessment between medical schools. That absence is important in the light of the GMC’s recent announcement of the introduction of the UKMLA (UK Medical Licensing Assessment) for all doctors who wish to practise in the UK. The present study aimed to quantify and compare the volume, type and intensity of summative assessment across medicine (A100) courses in the United Kingdom, and to assess whether intensity of assessment correlates with the postgraduate attainment of doctors from these schools.MethodsLocally knowledgeable students in each school were approached to take part in guided-questionnaire interviews via telephone or SkypeTM. Their understanding of assessment at their medical school was probed, and later validated with the assessment department of the respective medical school. We gathered data for 25 of 27 A100 programmes in the UK and compared volume, type and intensity of assessment between schools. We then correlated these data with the mean first-attempt score of graduates sitting MRCGP and MRCP(UK), as well as with UKFPO selection measures.ResultsThe median written assessment volume across all schools was 2000 min (mean = 2027, SD = 586, LQ = 1500, UQ = 2500, range = 1000–3200) and 1400 marks (mean = 1555, SD = 463, LQ = 1200, UQ = 1800, range = 1100–2800). The median practical assessment volume was 400 min (mean = 472, SD = 207, LQ = 400, UQ = 600, range = 200–1000). The median intensity (minutes per mark ratio) of summative written assessment was 1.24 min per mark (mean = 1.28, SD = 0.30, LQ = 1.11, UQ = 1.37, range = 0.85–2.08). An exploratory analysis suggested a significant correlation of total assessment time with mean first-attempt score on both the knowledge and the clinical assessments of MRCGP and of MRCP(UK).ConclusionsThere are substantial differences in the volume, format and intensity of undergraduate assessment between UK medical schools. These findings suggest a potential for differences in the reliability of detecting poorly performing students, or differences in identifying and stratifying academically equivalent students for ranking in the Foundation Programme Application System (FPAS). Furthermore, these differences appear to directly correlate with performance in postgraduate examinations. Taken together, our findings highlight highly variable local assessment procedures that warrant further investigation to establish their potential impact on students.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0428-9) contains supplementary ...

Formative student-authored question bank: perceptions, question quality and association with summative performance

“… 7–10 This finding might also suggest that there is value in increasing assessment frequency at medical schools to drive learning. 11 Surprisingly, question writing frequency also increased around examinations. This suggests a proportion of students found writing questions a worthwhile revision technique, despite the time commitment:…”

Exploring UK medical school differences: the MedDifs study of selection, teaching, student and F1 perceptions, postgraduate outcomes and fitness to practise

“…Schools differ not only in how they teach but in how they assess [23] and the standards that are set [8], the GMC report commenting that "There is also the moot point about how students are assessed. There is some evidence that assessment methods and standards for passing exams vary across medical schools."…”

Simulated eye surgery: The future of ophthalmology training?

“…Studies have shown medical school education has an impact on postgraduate performance. Medical students with more intense undergraduate assessments went on to do better in postgraduate membership examinations such as MRCP and MRCGP (Devine et al 2015). This suggests that the style of undergraduate training may be a better determinant of academic ability than the current educational performance ranking system, highlighting the potential need for a standardised examination to clearly identify the more academically able students.…”