Naslov
Portfolio as a part of GP's specialistic exam: inter-examiners diferences?

Autori
Vrcić-Keglević, Mladenka ; Tiljak, Hrvoje ; Lazic, Đurđica ; Cerovečki-Nekić, Venija ; Petriček, Goranka ; Ozvačić-Adžić, Zlata ; Murgić, Lucija.

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Sažeci sa skupova, sažetak, stručni

Izvornik
Book of Abstracts / - , 2009

Skup
15th Wonca Europe Conference: «The Fascination of Complexity – Dealing with individuals in a Field of Uncertainity»

Mjesto i datum
Basel, Švicarska, 16.09.2009. - 19.09.2009

Vrsta sudjelovanja
Predavanje

Vrsta recenzije
Međunarodna recenzija

Ključne riječi
Portfolio; assessment; familiy medicine

Sažetak
Introduction: Vocational training in General Practice / Family Medicine in Croatia lasts 3 years and consists of 3 parts: postgraduate course (7 months) ; hospital and outpatients (14 months) and practical work at GP's, trainers' practice (12 months). Specialist's exam consists of 2 parts: 1) preparatory part: portfolio, 8 written essays, trainer's assessment of clinical competence, trainer's progress report ; 2) final: written test – 120 questions, 25 OSCE, 5' stations and oral exam in front of three members jury. Each portfolio is assessed by the members of this jury. Aim of this study was to see if there were any differences among the portfolio assessors. Method: Portfolio assessment is qualitative according agreed criteria. Four learning outcomes are assessed: 1) aquisition of knowledge, comprehensive skills and attitudes ; 2) developmental achievement ; 3) clinical competence ; 4) ability to be «reflective practitioner». A quantity, the number of evidence and owerall quality are also assessed using scale from 1 (fail) to 5 (exelent). Resulta: Here are presented averrage grades for the quantity and owerall quality of the portfolios. Nine examiners reviewed in between 30 and 80 portfolios. There were differences between the assessors. Averrage marks for quantity (number of evidence) varied in between 2, 69 and 4, 06, and for owerall quality in between 3, 00 and 4, 19. For both category differences appeared in between two assessors. There were no big differences between seven other assessors. Conclusion: Those differencess were discussed within the group of examiners in order to improve a validity of the portfolio assessment.

Izvorni jezik
Engleski

Znanstvena područja
Javno zdravstvo i zdravstvena zaštita

POVEZANOST RADA