Advertisement

Electronic Test of Competence Administration: Qualitative Evaluation of Students’ Satisfaction on Telematic Platform a Cross Sectional Study

  • Albina PaternianiEmail author
  • Ilaria Farina
  • Giovanni Galeoto
  • Claudia Quaranta
  • Francesca Sperati
  • Julita Sansoni
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1008)

Abstract

Italian universities have introduced the Progress testing (PT) for a longitudinal assessment of student knowledge retention. This process provides educators a valid and reliable tool to assess learning while providing students measurement of competencies and self-evaluation of gaps in knowledge. The aim of the study is to evaluate the satisfaction of the students over three years in the nursing bachelor’s degree program at the Sapienza University of Rome, on the compilation of the Electronic Test of Competence (TECO) through the use of an instrument evaluation. The sample was recruited from October 2018 to December 2018 at Sapienza University of Rome. The population we investigated consists of 250 students; results indicate TECO useful for monitoring preparation of the students of degree course in nursing, evaluating the degree courses in nursing and for the evaluation of the degree program. In conclusion we can affirm that the students are partly satisfied with the TECO telematic administration, and evidentiated some doubts on the first part of final graphics.

Keywords

Telematic platform Nursing Electronic competence test TECO 

References

  1. 1.
    Blake, J.M., Norman, G.R., Keane, D.R., Mueller, C.B., Cunnington, J., Didyk, N.: Introducing progress testing in McMaster University’s problem based medical curriculum: psychometric properties and effect on learning. Acad. Med. (1996)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albanese, M., Case, S.: Progress testing: critical analysis and suggested practices. Adv. Health Sci. Educ. (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sum, V., McCaskey, S.J., Kyeyune, C.: A survey of satisfaction levels of graduate students enrolled in a nationally ranked top-10 program at a mid-western university. Res. High. Educ. J. (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen, Y., Henning, M., Yielder, J., Jones, R., Wearn, A., Weller, J.: Progress testing in the medical curriculum: students’ approaches to learning and perceived stress. BMC Med. Educ. (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Neeley, M., Ulman, A., Sydelko, S., Borges, J.: The value of progress testing in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review of the literature. Med. Sci. Educ. 26, 617–622 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galeoto, G., Rumiati, R., Sabella, M., Sansoni, J.: The use of a dedicated platform to evaluate health-professions university courses. In: Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced (2019)Google Scholar
  7. 7.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Albina Paterniani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ilaria Farina
    • 1
  • Giovanni Galeoto
    • 1
  • Claudia Quaranta
    • 2
  • Francesca Sperati
    • 3
  • Julita Sansoni
    • 1
  1. 1.Nursing Research Unit - Public Health and Infectious DiseaseSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.Sapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  3. 3.IFO – Regina Elena National Cancer InstituteRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations