Fortoul TI, Ochoa CA, Muñoz CA

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 49-61
PDF size: 524.24 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: It is desirable to have a rubric that assesses both written and oral skills because the doctoral candidacy examination is a high-stakes assessment.
Objective: To provide evidence of the validity of the use of rubrics in the assessment of students’ performance on the doctoral candidacy examination.
Method: Non-experimental cross-sectional study. A rubric was used that was modified from a previous one that evaluated the written part of the exam and another for the oral presentation. For both, a numerical scale was used to determine whether candidacy was granted or not. It was applied to 195 students of the generations 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 from all disciplinary areas. Reliability analysis, mean difference, and factor analysis to extract principal components have been performed.
Results: According to Messick, at least three sources of evidence for validity were obtained. Generation, gender of students, number of synods, and scores on the written and oral assessments did not differ in the numerical scores. The factorial analysis of both versions was grouped into a single dimension for the written section and into two for the oral section.
Conclusion: The new form of evaluation has worked and shows positive results, since the evaluation is more objective than the previous one, and the fact that it is collegial has allowed the unification of the evaluation among the Synods. With this instrument, written and oral communication skills are evaluated independently, and it will be interesting to follow up on the relevance of this separation on the results of the evaluation of the candidacy.

REFERENCES

1. UNAM PGdl. Reglamento General de Estudios de Posgrado.Coordinación General de Estudios de Posgrado UNAM; 2023. [Citado: 2023]. Disponible en: https://www.posgrado.unam.mx/comunidad/normatividad/reglamento-generalde-estudios-de posgrado/

2. Carrillo-Avalos BM, Sánchez-Mendiola M, Leenen I. El conceptode validez y su uso en educación médica. Investigaciónen Educación Médica. 2020;9(33):98-106.

3. Sidney UoT. HDR Student Candidature Stages Guideline -Faculty of Science Sidney: University of Technology Sidney;2018. Disponible en: https://www.uts.edu.au/sites/default/files/2019-08/sci-hdr-student-candidature-stages-guideline.pdf

4. Posgrado de Ciencias Bioquímicas U. Plan de estudios delPosgrado de Ciencias Bioquímicas, UNAM Cd. Mx.: Programade Maestría y Doctorado en Ciencias Bioquímicas,UNAM; 2010. Disponible en: https://bioquimicas.posgrado.unam.mx.

5. PMDCMOS. Plan de Estudios de Maestría y Doctoradoen Ciencias Médicas Odontológicas y de la Salud. Cd. Mx.UNAM: PMDCMOS, UNAM; 2010. Disponible en: https://www.pmdcmos.unam.mx

6. Peeters MJ, Sahloff EG, Stone GE. A standardized rubric to evaluatestudent presentations. Am J Pharm Educ. 2010;74(9):171.

7. Olvera-López A, Pompa-Mansilla M, Maya-López MPJ, HernándezFlores MD, Garcia-Minjares M, Sánchez-MendiolaM, Fortoul TI. El reto de evaluar presentaciones orales: usode una rúbrica en un posgrado de educación médica. Investigaciónen Educación Médica. 2021;10:35-42.

8. León-Borquez R, Lara-Velez VM, Abreu-Hernández LF. Educaciónmédica en México. Revista de la Fundación EducaciónMédica. 2018;21(3):119-28.

9. AREA. American Educational Research Association, AmericanPsychological Association and National Council onMeasurement in Education, and Joint Committee on Standardsfor Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington,D.C.: American Psychological; 2014. [Citado: 2023].Disponible en: https://tinyurl.com/2djy4hjr

10. Cooksey R, McDonald G. What Skills do I need? 2019. En:Surviving and Thriving in Postgraduate Research [Internet].Singapure: Springer. pp. 27-53.

11. Horta H, J.M. S. The Impact of Publishing during PhD Studieson Career Research Publication, Visibility, and Collaborations.Research in Higher Education. 2016;57(1):28-50.

12. Reidl-Martínez LM. Confiabiliddad en la Medición. Investigaciónen Educación Médica. 2013;2(6):107-11.

13. Bosanquet A. Academic, Woman, Mother: Negotiating Multiplesubjectivities during early career. En: Rachel ThwaitesAP, editor. Being an Early career Feminist academic: globalperspectives, experiences, and challenges. Palgrave studiesin gender and education. London: Palgrave, Macmillan; 2017.pp. 73-91.

14. Campillo-Labrandero M, Martínez-González A, García-MinjaresM, Guerrero Mora L, Sánchez-Mendiola M. Desempeñoacadémico y egreso en 25 generaciones de estudiantes dela Facultad de Medicina de la UNAM. Educación Médica.2021;22:67-72.

15. Downing SM. Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessmentdata. Med Educ. 2003;37(9):830-7.