|
Scritto da BMC Medicine
|
 Background:Failure rates in postgraduate examinations are often high, and many candidates therefore retake examinations on several or even many times. Little however is known about how candidates perform across those multiple attempts. A key theoretical question to be resolved is whether candidates pass at a resit because they have got better, having acquired more knowledge or skills, or whether they have got lucky, chance helping them to get over the pass mark. In the UK, the issue of resits has become of particular interest since the General Medical Council issued a consultation, and is considering limiting the number of attempts candidates may make at examinations.Methods:Since 1999 the examination for Membership of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom (MRCP(UK)) has imposed no limit on the number of attempts candidates can make at its Part 1, Part2 or PACES (Clinical) examination. The present study examined performance of candidates on the examinations from 2002/3 to 2010, during which time the examination structure has been stable. Data were available for 70,856 attempts at Part 1 by 39,335 candidates, 37,654 attempts at Part 2 by 23,637 candidates, and 40,303 attempts at PACES by 21,270 candidates, with the maximum number of attempts being 26, 21 and 14 respectively. The results were analysed using multilevel modelling, fitting negative exponential growth curves to individual candidate performance.Results:The numbers of candidates taking the assessment falls exponentially at each attempt. Performance improves across attempts, with evidence in the Part 1 exam that candidates are still improving up to the 10th attempt, with a similar improvement up to the 4th attempt in Part 2 and the 6th attempt at PACES. Random effects modelling shows that candidates begin at a starting level, with performance increasing by a smaller amount at each attempt, with evidence of a maximum, asymptotic level for candidates, and candidates showing variation in starting level, rate of improvement and maximum level. Modelling longitudinal performance across the three diets (sittings) shows that the starting level at Part 1 predicts starting level at both Part 2 and PACES, and the rate of improvement at Part 1 also predicted starting level at Part 2 and PACES.Conclusion:Candidates continue to show evidence of true improvement in performance up to at least the 10th attempt at MRCP(UK) Part 1, although there are individual differences in the starting level, the rate of improvement and the maximum level that can be achieved. Such findings provide little support for arguments that candidates should only be allowed a fixed number of attempts at an examination. However unlimited numbers of attempts are also difficult to justify because of the inevitable and ever increasing role that luck must play with increasing numbers of resits, so that the issue of multiple attempts might be better addressed by tackling the difficult question of how a pass mark should increase with each attempt at an exam.
Fonte: BMC Medicine |
