Oral Examinations: What Medical Students and Examiners think! Comparison of Opinions on Oral Examination
Keywords:
Oral examinations, Viva Examinations, Medical Education, Structured oral examinations, AssessmentAbstract
Objectives: To compare medical students’ and examiners’ views on current oral exam system.
Method: Students of five and examiners from two medical colleges were included. Convenient-sampling was done. Anonymous questionnaires were distributed. SPSS-18.0 was used for data-entry and analysis. Descriptive statistics were computed; Statistical significance was tested using Chi-square.
Results: 347 students (232 females/115 males) and 30 (15 females/15 males) examiners participated. Both parties believed oral exams improve confidence, communication skills and knowledge. 71% (n=161) students preferring a male examiner were females [F(337)=7.869, p=0.005)]. 69% (n=98) students labeling their pre-exam stress severe were females [F(342)=6.602, p=0.048)]. 76% (n=260) students and 33% (n=10) examiners thought syllabus topics are covered disproportionately. 44% (n=58) students scoring poor in oral exams considered number of mocks insufficient [F(330)=.008,p=0.928)].66% (n=111) students agreeing internal examiners frequently repeating questions preferred appearing at middle-late order [F(339)=9.312,p=0.054)]. 73% (n=250) students and 20% (n=6) examiners found time-distribution unequal. >70% students and examiners viewed students’ linguistic-skills, appearance, contrast-error and inter-rater variability as biases influencing results. 28% (n=8) examiners supported mandatory nature of oral exams. No examiner had ever received any training for conducting oral exams. 86% students (n=289) and examiners (n=24) agreed on need of examiners’ training.74% (n=116) of students against current system and 72% (n=20) examiners preferred structured oral exams.
Conclusion: Traditional oral examinations are viewed as necessary, productive, yet inconsistent and biased. Stress is higher in females. Proportionate syllabus content, equal time-distribution and enough mock exams should be incorporated. Question repetition, biases, and poor scores can be avoided by training examiners and/or structured oral examinations.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Madiha Haque, Rehmani Sameerah Ibtisam, Tajammal Mustafa, Sadia Qayyum, Qurrat Ul Ain Tahir, Samina Baig Melsing, Farida Rafique
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Readers may “Share-copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format” and “Adapt-remix, transform, and build upon the material”. The readers must give appropriate credit to the source of the material and indicate if changes were made to the material. Readers may not use the material for commercial purpose. The readers may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
