Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prüfungen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Medizindidaktik

  • 4320 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Prüfungen erfüllen aus didaktischer Sicht wichtige Funktionen. Besonders hervorzuheben ist deren Einfluss auf das Lernen („assessment drives learning“). Nach der Darstellung der Anforderungen an Prüfungen aus messtheoretischer Sicht sowie der Prüfungsplanung werden die einzelnen Prüfungsformate (schriftlich, mündlich, praktisch) dargestellt. Ein besonderes Augenmerk liegt dabei auf den Multiple-Choice-Fragen, die charakteristisch für das Medizinstudium sind. Es werden Tipps für die Formulierung guter Fragen sowie Hinweise zu deren Wiederverwendung gegeben. Mit dem „Key-Feature-Problem“ und dem „Script Concordance Test“ werden weitere Möglichkeiten der schriftlichen Prüfung beschrieben. Im Teil zu den mündlichen Prüfungen werden Einflussfaktoren auf die Bewertung und Anregungen für die generelle Verbesserung betrachtet. Hinsichtlich der praktischen Prüfungen werden neben der Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) auch Möglichkeiten aufgezeigt, wie Prüfungen im Rahmen der klinischen Tätigkeit durchgeführt werden können.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 37.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Beyer A, Dreier A, Kirschner S, Hoffmann W (2016) Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) als kompetenz-orientiertes Prüfungsinstrument in der pflegerischen Erstausbildung. Pflege 29:193–203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bodle JF, Kaufmann SJ, Bisson D et al. (2008) Value and face validity of objective structured assessment of technical skills (OSATS) for work based assessment of surgical skills in obstetrics and gynaecology. Med Teach 30:212–216

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bok HGJ, Teunissen PW, Favier RP et al. (2013) Programmatic assessment of competency-based workplace learning: when theory meets practice. BMC Med Educ 13:123

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Brannick MT, Erol-Korkmaz HT, Prewett M (2011) A systematic review of the reliability of objective structured clinical examination scores. Med Educ 45:1181–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley S, Coleman J, Davison I et al. (2009) The educational effects of portfolios on undergraduate student learning: A Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) systematic review. BEME Guide No. 11. Med Teach 31:282–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Case SM, Swanson DB (1993) Extended-matching items: A practical alternative to free-response questions. Teach Learn Med 5:107–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Case SM, Swanson DB (2002) Constructing Written Test Questions For the Basic and Clinical Sciences. National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME)

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlin B, Roy L, Brailovsky C et al. (2000) The Script Concordance Test: A Tool to Assess the Reflective Clinician. Teach Learn Med 12:189–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cömert M, Zill JM, Christalle E et al. (2016) Assessing Communication Skills of Medical Students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) – A Systematic Review of Rating Scales. PLoS One 11:e0152717

    Google Scholar 

  • Dannefer EF, Henson LC (2007) The portfolio approach to competency-based assessment at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine. Acad Med 82:493–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra J, Galbraith R, Hodges BD et al. (2012) Expert validation of fit-for-purpose guidelines for designing programmes of assessment. BMC Med Educ 12:20

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Donato AA, George DL (2012) A blueprint for implementation of a structured portfolio in an internal medicine residency. Acad Med 87:185–191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dong T, Swygert KA, Durning SJ et al. (2014) Validity evidence for medical school OSCEs: associations with USMLE{\circledR} step assessments. Teach Learn Med 26:379–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dory V, Gagnon R, Vanpee D, Charlin B (2012) How to construct and implement script concordance tests: Insights from a systematic review. Med Educ 46:552–563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen E (2017) Do portfolios have a future? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 22:221–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen E, van Tartwijk J, Vermunt JD, van der Vleuten CPM (2003) Use of portfolios in early undergraduate medical training. Med Teach 25:18–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen EW, van Tartwijk J, Overeem K et al. (2005) Conditions for successful reflective use of portfolios in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ 39:1230–1235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen E, van Tartwijk J, van der Vleuten C, Wass V (2007a) Portfolios in medical education: why do they meet with mixed success? A systematic review. Med Educ 41:1224–1233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen EW, Muijtjens AMM, van Tartwijk J, van der Vleuten CPM (2007b) Web- or paper-based portfolios: is there a difference? Med Educ 41:1067–1073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driessen EW, Van Tartwijk J, Govaerts M et al. (2012) The use of programmatic assessment in the clinical workplace: a Maastricht case report. Med Teach 34:226–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Durning SJ, Cation LJ, Markert RJ, Pangaro LN (2002) Assessing the reliability and validity of the mini-clinical evaluation exercise for internal medicine residency training. Acad Med 77:900–904

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fabry G (2008) Medizindidaktik. Ein Handbuch für die Praxis. Verlag Hans Huber, Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer MR, Kopp V, Holzer M et al. (2005) A modified electronic key feature examination for undergraduate medical students: validation threats and opportunities. Med Teach 27:450–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fournier JP, Demeester A, Charlin B (2008) Script Concordance Tests: Guidelines for Construction. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 8:18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman Ben-David M (2000) Standard setting in student assessment. Med Teach 22:120–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleeson F (2009) AMEE Medical Education Guide No. 9. Assessment of clinical competence using the Objective Structured Long Examination Record (OSLER). Med Teach 19:7–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guttormsen S, Beyeler C, Bonvin R et al. (2013) The new licencing examination for human medicine: from concept to implementation. Swiss Med Wkly 143:w13897

    Google Scholar 

  • Häcker TH (2011) Portfolio: ein Entwicklungsinstrument für selbstbestimmtes Lernen: Eine explorative Studie zur Arbeit mit Portfolios in der Sekundarstufe I, 3., unveränd. Aufl. Schneider-Verl, Hohengehren, Baltmannsweiler

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakstian AR (1971) The effects of type of examination anticipated on test preparation and performance. J Educ Res 64:319–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harden RM (1990) Twelve tips for organizing an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). Med Teach 12:259–264

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harden RM, Gleeson FA (1979) Assessment of clinical competence using an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Med Eucation 13:41–54

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison C, Wass V (2016) The challenge of changing to an assessment for learning culture. Med Educ 50:702–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins RE, Margolis MJ, Durning SJ, Norcini JJ (2010) Constructing a validity argument for the mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise: a review of the research. Acad Med 85:1453–1461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hift RJ (2014) Should essays and other „open-ended“-type questions retain a place in written summative assessment in clinical medicine? BMC Med Educ 14:249

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges BD, Hollenberg E, McNaughton N et al. (2014) The Psychiatry OSCE: a 20-year retrospective. Acad Psychiatry 38:26–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hrynchak P, Glover Takahashi S, Nayer M (2014) Key-feature questions for assessment of clinical reasoning: A literature review. Med Educ 48:870–883

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Huber-Lang M, Palmer A, Grab C et al. (2017) Visions and reality: the idea of competence-oriented assessment for German medical students is not yet realised in licensing examinations. GMS J Med Educ 34:Doc25

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelava A, Moosbrugger H (2012) Deskriptivstatistische Evaluation von Items (Itemanalyse) und Testwertverteilungen. In: Moosbrugger H, Kelava A (Hrsg) Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, S 75–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogan JR, Bellini LM, Shea JA (2002) Implementation of the mini-CEX to evaluate medical students’ clinical skills. Acad Med 77:1156–1157

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE (2009) Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: a systematic review. JAMA 302:1316–1326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kopp V, Möltner A, Fischer MR (2006) Key-Feature-Probleme zum Prüfen von prozeduralem Wissen: Ein Praxisleitfaden. GMS Z Med Ausbild 23:Doc50

    Google Scholar 

  • Krebs R (2004) Anleitung zur Herstellung von MC-Fragen und MC-Prüfungen für die ärztliche Ausbildung. Institut für Medizinische Lehre, Abteilung für Assessment und Evaluation, Universität Bern

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee V, Brain K, Martin J (2017) Factors Influencing Mini-CEX Rater Judgments and Their Practical Implications: A Systematic Literature Review. Acad Med 92:880–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lineberry M, Kreiter CD, Bordage G (2013) Threats to validity in the use and interpretation of script concordance test scores. Med Educ 47:1175–1183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little-Wienert K, Mazziotti M (2017) Twelve tips for creating an academic teaching portfolio. Med Teach, Aug 17 2017, pp 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin JA, Regehr G, Reznick R et al. (1997) Objective structured assessment of technical skill (OSATS) for surgical residents. Br J Surg 84:273–278

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Möltner A, Schellberg D, Jünger J (2006) Grundlegende quantitative Analysen medizinischer Prüfungen. Basic quantitative analyses of medical examinations. GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung 23:Doc53

    Google Scholar 

  • Moonen-van Loon JMW, Overeem K, Donkers HHLM et al. (2013) Composite reliability of a workplace-based assessment toolbox for postgraduate medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 18:1087–1102

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moosbrugger H, Kelava A (2012) Qualitätsanforderungen an einen psychologischen Test (Testgütekriterien). In: Moosbrugger H, Kelava A (Hrsg) Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, S 7–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller S, Dahmen U, Settmacher U (2016) Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) an Medizinischen Fakultäten in Deutschland – eine Bestandsaufnahme. Das Gesundheitswesen. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-116435

  • Norcini JJ (2003) Standard setting on educational tests. Med Educ 37:464–469

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norcini JJ, Blank LL, Arnold GK, Kimball HR (1995) The mini-CEX (clinical evaluation exercise): a preliminary investigation. Ann Intern Med 123:795–799

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norcini JJ, Blank LL, Duffy FD, Fortna GS (2003) The mini-CEX: A method for assessing clinical skills. Ann Intern Med 138:476–481

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien CL, Sanguino SM, Thomas JX, Green MM (2016) Feasibility and Outcomes of Implementing a Portfolio Assessment System Alongside a Traditional Grading System. Acad Med 91:1554–1560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien CL, Thomas JX, Green MM (2018) What Is the Relationship Between a Preclerkship Portfolio Review and Later Performance in Clerkships? Academic Medicine. 93(1):113–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson F, Zibarras L, Ashworth V (2016) Situational judgement tests in medical education and training: Research, theory and practice: AMEE Guide No. 100. Med Teach 38:3–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pell G, Fuller R, Homer M, Roberts T (2010) How to measure the quality of the OSCE: A review of metrics – AMEE guide no. 49. Med Teach 32:802–811

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Preusche I, Schmidts M, Wagner-Menghin M (2012) Twelve tips for designing and implementing a structured rater training in OSCEs. Med Teach 34:368–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pugh D, Bhanji F, Cole G et al. (2016) Do OSCE progress test scores predict performance in a national high-stakes examination? Med Educ 50:351–358

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez MC (2005) Three Options Are Optimal for Multiple-Choice Items: A Meta-Analysis of 80 Years of Research. Educ Meas Issues Pract 24:3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruesseler M, Weinlich M, Byhahn C et al. (2010) Increased authenticity in practical assessment using emergency case OSCE stations. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 15:81–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schermelleh-Engel K, Werner CS (2012) Methoden der Reliabilitätsbestimmung. In: Moosbrugger H, Kelava A (Hrsg) Testtheorie und Fragebogenkonstruktion. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, S 119–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleicher I, Leitner K, Juenger J et al. (2017a) Examiner effect on the objective structured clinical exam – a study at five medical schools. BMC Med Educ 17:71

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleicher I, Leitner K, Juenger J et al. (2017b) Does quantity ensure quality? Standardized OSCE-stations for outcome-oriented evaluation of practical skills at different medical faculties. Ann Anat 212:55–60

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schrauth M, Riessen R, Wirtz TSH et al. (2005) Praktische Prüfungen sind machbar. Medizinische Ausbildung 22:20–22

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuwirth L, Ash J (2013) Assessing tomorrow’s learners: in competency-based education only a radical different holistic method of assessment will work. Six things we could forget. Med Teach 35:555–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schuwirth L, van der Vleuten C (2004) Different written assessment methods: What can be said about their strengths and weakness? Med Educ 38:974–979

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scouller K (1998) The influence of assessment method on students’ learning approaches: Multiple choice question examination versus assignment essay. High Educ 35(4):453–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard LA (2000) The Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture. 29:4–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Surry LT, Torre D, Durning SJ (2017) Exploring examinee behaviours as validity evidence for multiple-choice question examinations. Med Educ 51(10):1075–1085

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomann LC (2011) Portfolio im Modellstudiengang Medizin der RWTH Aachen – Intention bei Einführung, Statusanalyse und Ermittlung der studentischen Anforderungen zur Implementierung eines elektronischen Portfolios. Dissertation, Rheinisch-Westfälischen Technischen Hochschule Aachen

    Google Scholar 

  • Tigelaar DEH, Dolmans DHJM, Grave WS et al. (2006) Participants’ opinions on the usefulness of a teaching portfolio. Med Educ 40:371–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Traynor M, Galanouli D, Rice B, Lynn F (2016) Evaluating the objective structured long examination record for nurse education. Br J Nurs 25:681–687

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Vleuten CPM (1996) The Assessment of Professional Competence: Developments, Research and Practical Implications. Adv Heal Sci Educ 1:41–67

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Vleuten CPM (2016) Revisiting „Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes“. Med Educ 50:885–888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Vleuten CPM, Schuwirth LWT (2005) Assessing professional competence: From methods to programmes. Med Educ 39:309–317

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L, Driessen EW, Govaerts M (2015) Twelve Tips for programmatic assessment. Med Teach 37:641–646

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeford R, Southgate L, Wass V (1995) Improving Oral Examinations: Selecting, Training, And Monitoring Examiners For The. BMJ 311:931–935

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wass V, Jones R, van der Vleuten C (2001a) Standardized or real patients to test clinical competence? The long case revisited. Med Educ 35:321–325

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wass V, van der Vleuten C, Shatzer J, Jones R (2001b) Assessment of clinical competence. Lancet 357:945–949

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Webb TP, Merkley TR (2012) An evaluation of the success of a surgical resident learning portfolio. J Surg Educ 69:1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiliam D (2011) What is assessment for learning? Stud Educ Eval 37:3–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

Internetadresse

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Goethe-Universität, Fachbereich Medizin, Frankf. Arbeitsstelle für Medizindidaktik, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland

    Thomas Kollewe

  2. Goethe-Universität, Fachbereich Medizin, Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland

    Monika Sennekamp

  3. Universitätsklinikum, Klinik für Dermatologie, Venerologie und Allergologie, Frankfurt am Main, Deutschland

    Falk Ochsendorf

Authors
  1. Thomas Kollewe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monika Sennekamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Falk Ochsendorf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kollewe, T., Sennekamp, M., Ochsendorf, F. (2018). Prüfungen. In: Medizindidaktik. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56305-2_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-56305-2_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-56304-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-56305-2

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation