Comparison of weighted and composite scores for pre‐clinical dental learners

Abstract

The CS method produced more reliable scores, resulting in moderate agreement with the WM and major shift in students' ranks. These findings necessitate further validity considerations before implementing the CS method and call for further studies that examine the consequences of composite measures in dental education.

Comparative evaluation of weighted mean and composite score for combining assessments

“…Additionally, high CS reliability was calculated for all courses within cohort 1 (0.79–0.9) and cohort 2 (0.81–0.9). This is in agreement with findings from Nassar et al 8 . and Park et al 16 .…”

“…This has huge implications if the CS approach is to be applied as a marked and sudden shift in students’ ranking and passing counts would result into a sudden drop in academic achievements between cohorts. This trend is similar to the one observed in our pilot investigation where 80% of the cohort had their ranks changed and a fivefold increase in failure counts were recorded 8 . Utilizing the CS approach will aid educators to identify underachieving students more confidently.…”

“…In 2004, Kane and Case suggested a combination approach that can remedy some of those shortcomings by incorporating the reliability of the subcomponents as well as their association to calculate a CS that is reliable and valid 9 . That method has showed some promise of increasing reliability in two recent reports 8,16 . Hence, the main objective of the current study was to compare the WM method to the CS approach in combining assessment scores, using data from the Operative Dentistry Curriculum at King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Dentistry, to demonstrate this methodology.…”

“…A pilot report was published in 2018 comparing WM to CS methods by considering a limited subset of assessments within the final examination of a single Preclinical Course (PCC) for 123 students 8 . Assessments included a written examination, an objective structured practical examination, and a final practice exercise.…”

“…One of the mostly common approaches for combining scores is using the weighted mean (WM) approach obtained by summing the product of each assessment component grade and weight. [6][7][8] Although this method is convenient and is utilized by most institutions in the health professions, it does not take into account the relationship (association), reliability, or the validity evidence supporting each assessment component. 9 Moreover, the weight of each individual component can be arbitrary and usually determined based on subjective interpretation of assessment's importance or value.…”