Premium
Confidence based marking in a medical physiology course
Author(s) -
Wood Stephen C.,
Seidel Charles,
Rojas José,
Sheakley Maria
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.21.5.a214-d
Subject(s) - formative assessment , confidence interval , curriculum , psychology , medical education , raw score , mathematics education , medicine , statistics , raw data , pedagogy , mathematics
Confidence Based Marking (CBM) of physiology exams encourages students to think more carefully about their knowledge base ( www.ucl.ac.uk/lapt ). CBM grades an exam according to students' self assigned level of confidence in each answer. Confidence levels are 1 (not sure), 2 (fairly sure) and 3 (very sure). Points given are 1, 2, and 3 if correct and 0, −2, and −4 if incorrect. Students are rewarded for knowing what they know and what they don't know. Students are willing to risk negative points if confident and wrong or admit uncertainty and assign a score of 1 to eliminate risk. Faculty benefits by identifying misconceptions in the curriculum. We employed CBM in formative tests of physiology concepts in a 2‐semester course. Students were tested individually, then in teams of 8–10 to answer 10‐question quizzes. Results showed that both the raw score and CBM score improved dramatically in group testing. Individual students demonstrated inappropriate levels of confidence compared to groups. The hypothesis being tested is that individual CBM scores will improve with experience (Semester 2 vs. 1).