Exploring the validity of assessment in anatomy: Do images influence cognitive processes used in answering extended matching questions?

Anatomical Sciences Education

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 107-116

  Vorstenbosch, Marc A T M ^a   Bouter, Shifra T ^a   van den Hurk, Marianne M ^b   Kooloos, Jan G M ^a   Bolhuis, Sanneke M ^a   Laan, Roland F J M ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Assessment methods; Examinations; Gross anatomy education; Images in assessments; Medical education

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANATOMY; ASSOCIATION; COGNITION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EDUCATION; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MENTAL CAPACITY; MULTIMEDIA; NETHERLANDS; PROCEDURES; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ADULT; ANATOMY; COGNITION; CUES; EDUCATION, MEDICAL; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MENTAL COMPETENCY; MULTIMEDIA; NETHERLANDS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 84894458762     PISSN: 19359772     EISSN: 19359780     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ase.1382     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Ainsworth S. 1999. The functions of multiple representations. Comput Educ 33:131-152.
2. Bartholomé T, Bromme R. 2009. Coherence formation when learning from text and pictures: What kind of support for whom? J Educ Psychol 101:282-293.
3. Beagle JM. 2009. Pictures versus text: Modality effects across three levels of learning and study time. Purdue University: West Lafayette, IN. Doctorate of Philosophy Dissertation. 314 p.
4. Bergman EM, van der Vleuten CP, Scherpbier AJ. 2011. Why don't they know enough about anatomy? A narrative review. Med Teach 33:403-409.
5. Beullens J, Struyf E, Van Damme B. 2005. Do extended matching multiple-choice questions measure clinical reasoning? Med Educ 39:410-417.
6. Brainerd CJ, Desrochers A, Howe ML. 1981. Stages-of-learning analysis of picture-word effects in associative memory. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn Mem 7:1-14.
7. Burns ER. 2010. "Anatomizing" reversed: Use of examination questions that foster use of higher order learning skills by students. Anat Sci Educ 3:330-334.
8. Case SM, Swanson DB. 1993. Extended-matching items: A practical alternative to free-response questions. Teach Learn Med 5:107-115.
9. Crispa V, Sweirya E. 2006. Can a picture ruin a thousand words? The effects of visual resources in exam questions. Educ Res 48:139-154.
10. Dangerfield P, Bradley P, Gibbs T. 2000. Learning gross anatomy in a clinical skills course. Clin Anat 13:444-447.
11. Dijkstra J, Van der Vleuten CP, Schuwirth LW. 2010. A new framework for designing programmes of assessment. Adv Health Sci Educ 15:379-393.
12. Ericsson KA, Simon HA. 1993. Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. 2nd Ed. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 496 p.
13. Fasel JH. 1998. Teaching of gross anatomy to medical undergraduates: General practice as a guideline? A synopsis. J Anat 192:305-306.
14. Fleming ND, Mills C. 1992. Not another inventory, rather a catalyst for reflection. Improv Acad 11:137-142.
15. Ginns P. 2005. Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learn Instruct 15:313-331.
16. Guillot A, Champely S, Batier C, Thiriet P, Collet C. 2007. Relationship between spatial abilities, mental rotation and functional anatomy learning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 12:491-507.
17. Hegarty M, Keehner M, Khooshabeh P, Montello DR. 2009. How spatial abilities enhance, and are enhanced by, dental education. Learn Individ Diff 19:61-70.
18. Hunt DR. 1978. Illustrated multiple choice examinations. Med Educ 12:417-420.
19. Kozhevnikov M, Hegarty M, Mayer RE. 2002. Revising the visualizer-verbalizer dimension: Evidence for two types of visualizers. Cogn Instruct 20:47-77.
20. Langlois J, Wells GA, Lecourtois M, Bergeron G, Yetisir E, Martin M. 2009. Spatial abilities in an elective course of applied anatomy after a problem-based learning curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 2:107-112.
21. Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL 3rd. 2008. Test-enhanced learning in medical education. Med Educ 42:959-966.
22. Larsen DP, Butler AC, Roediger HL 3rd. 2009. Repeated testing improves long-term retention relative to repeated study: A randomised controlled trial. Med Educ 43:1174-1181.
23. Leite WL, Svinicki M, Shi Y. 2010. Attempted validation of the scores of the VARK: Learning styles inventory with multitrait-multimethod confirmatory factor analysis models. Educ Psychol Meas 70:323-339.
24. Lufler RS, Zumwalt AC, Romney CA, Hoagland TM. 2012. Effect of visual-spatial ability on medical students' performance in a gross anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ 5:3-9.
25. Luursema J-M, Verwey WB, Kommers PA, Annema J-H. 2008. The role of stereopsis in virtual anatomical learning. Interact Comput 20:455-460.
26. Mathaia S, Ramadasa J. 2009. Visuals and visualisation of human body systems. Int J Sci Educ 31:439-458.
27. Mayer RE, Massa LJ. 2003. Three facets of visual and verbal learners: Cognitive ability, cognitive style, and learning preference. J Educ Psychol 95:833-841.
28. McCuskey RS, Carmichael SW, Kirch DG. 2005. The importance of anatomy in health professions education and the shortage of qualified educators. Acad Med 80:349-351.
29. Messick S. 1980. Test validity and the ethics of assessment. Am Psychol 35:1012-1027.
30. Peters M, Laeng B, Latham K, Jackson M, Zaiyouna R, Richardson C. 1995. A redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse mental rotations test: Different versions and factors that affect performance. Brain Cogn 28:39-58.
31. Ramadasa J. 2009. Visual and spatial modes in science learning. Int J Sci Educ 31:301-318.
32. Rochford K. 1985. Special learning disabilities and underachievement among university anatomy students. Med Educ 19:13-26.
33. Rowland S, Ahmed K, Davies DC, Ashrafian H, Patel V, Darzi A, Paraskeva PA, Athanasiou T. 2011. Assessment of anatomical knowledge for clinical practice: Perceptions of clinicians and students. Surg Radiol Anat 33:263-269.
34. Schnotz W. 2002. Commentary: Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educ Psychol Rev 14:101-120.
35. st Ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. p 49-69.
36. Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. 2004. Different written assessment methods: What can be said about their strengths and weaknesses? Med Educ 38:974-979.
37. Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. 2011. Programmatic assessment: From assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Med Teach 33:478-485.
38. Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP, Donkers HH. 1996. A closer look at cueing effects in multiple-choice questions. Med Educ 30:44-49.
39. Schuwirth LW, Verheggen MM, van der Vleuten CP, Boshuizen HP, Dinant GJ. 2001. Do short cases elicit different thinking processes than factual knowledge questions do? Med Educ 35:348-356.
40. Seale JK, Chapman J, Davey C. 2000. The influence of assessments on students' motivation to learn in a therapy degree course. Med Educ 34:614-621.
41. Shepard LA. 2000. The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educ Res 29:4-14.
42. Smith CF. 2007. An investigation into medical students' approaches to anatomy learning in a systems-based prosection course. Clin Anat 20:843-848.
43. Standing L, Smith P. 1975. Verbal-pictorial transformation in recognition memory. Can J Psychol 29:316-326.
44. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. 2010. The anatomy of anatomy: A review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ 3:83-93.
45. Turney BW. 2007. Anatomy in a modern medical curriculum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 89:104-107.
46. Vahalia KV, Subramaniam K, Marks SC Jr, De Souza EJ. 1995. The use of multiple-choice tests in anatomy: Common pitfalls and how to avoid them. Clin Anat 8:61-65.
47. Van der Vleuten CP. 1996. The assessment of professional competence: Developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 1:41-67.
48. Van der Vleuten CP, Schuwirth LW. 2005. Assessing professional competence: From methods to programmes. Med Educ 39:309-317.
49. Vandenberg SG, Kuse AR. 1978. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Percept Motor Skill 47:599-604.
50. Vorstenbosch MA, Klaassen TP, Kooloos JG, Bolhuis SM, Laan RF. 2013. Do images influence assessment in anatomy? Exploring the effect of images on item difficulty and item discrimination. Anat Sci Educ 6:29-41.
51. Witteman MJ, Segers E. 2010. The modality effect tested in children in a user-paced multimedia environment. J Comput Assist Learn 26:132-142.