Rating assessment of students on internal

diseases: traditional or innovative form?

Ass.prof. I. Khlopina

Internal medicine courses

Faculty’s therapyPropaedeuticsof internal diseases

Hospital’s therapy Polyclinic therapy

Traditional 4-points form of student’s knowledge control

• Questioning at practical lessons• Test controls• Clinical test cases discussion• Writing of patient’s history• Exam

Limitations of traditional 4-points form of student’s knowledge control

• Absence of systematic conduction of control activities

• Subjectiveness of control mark• Occasion in getting tasks and questions for control

test

Introduction of rating system of student’s knowledge control

• Federal Law on higher education (№ 125 from 22 August 1996)

• Methodic recommendations of Ministry of Education of Russia from 11 July 2002 №2654 «About experiment on introduction of rating system of student’s knowledge control in Universities»

Rating

Usually Rating is concidered to be an «accumulated mark», or «mark in its

historical development» In universities Rating means quantity

measure, shown in multi-points scale and is integrally characterizing the student’s

knowledge and competence

Rating system takes into account:

• Active and rhythmic self-work of a student during a semester

• Presentation of test control tasks at strict scheduled time-schedule

• Concideration of “previous study successes” of a student• Information on lectures and classes visited by a student• «optional» training program

Stages of introduction of rating system of student’s knowledge control

• Development of methodology based on state education standards

• Several discussions on Chairs, Faculty’s Council and at Methodic conference of NSMU

• Intruduction of rating system on Chairs starting from 2000.• Further perfectioning of rating system – introduction of

“through-out” rating system on all courses of internal diseases (2003)

Calculation of pointsChair No of study hours Max points

Propaedeutics 205 (23%) 186 (24%)

Faculty’s therapy 163 (17%) 132 (17%)

Hospital therapyV yearVI year

133 (14%) 278 (30%)

107 (14%)196 (25%)

Polyclinic therapy 127 (14%) 138 (17%)

Total 917 759

Calculation of points “Unified Rating System of knowledge control in internal diseases”

№ Chair Excellent Good Satisfactory

1 Propaedeutics 167(90%)

148(80%)

130(70%)

2 Faculty’s therapy 118(90%)

105(80%)

92(70%)

3 Hospital therapy V year 96(90%)

84(79%)

92(66%)

VI year 176(90%)

146(76%)

121(62%)

4 Polyclinic therapy 124(90%)

103(75%)

83(60%)

5 Total 681(90%)

586(77%)

518(65%)

Scheme of points calculation in propaedeutics

Activity Max No of points

«General Care» - test control of out-coming knowledge 5Visiting lectures 26Visiting practice 30

Results of topic-end control 30Assessment of topic-end skills 30

Final testing 10Final skills control 10

Points for patient history 10Exam-conversation 15

Exam - ECG 5Exam – laboratory tests 5

Bonus points 10Total 186

Protocol of rating marks in group №1

ФИО Оценка

практики

Остаточныезнания

Факультативные

лекции

Курсовые

лекции

Посещение

занятий

Оценки

семинаров

Самостоятельная

работа

Практические умения ИТК Поощрит.баллы

Внутренние

болезни

ЭВН

Законодательство

Диагностика

Лечение

Мед. документ

Диспансеризация

Рецепты

Санпросвет. работа

Поликлиника

Скорая помощь

ЭВН

Доклад

больного

Курсовая

работа

Иванов С.Н.

Конев Р. К.

Шульга Н. Р.

Янсон К. Т.

Average rating point among therapy’s graduates in 2011

6 12

28

3915

Отлично (более 90%)

Хорошо (87-89%)

Хорошо (84-86%)

Хорошо (80-83%)

Удовлетворительно(более 70%)

Correspondence of points in rating system and in State Exam

Rating points in therapy

Through-out rating point in therapy (% of

students)

Exam mark State exam (% of students)

Over 90% 6% Excellent 9%

87-89% 12% good 9%

84-86% 15% good 15%

80-83% 28% good 13%

Over 70% 39% satisfactory 54%

Stimulating student’s activity

Granting the President’s bourse

Granting the University’s bourse

Increasing main bourse

Free-of-charge subscription to newspapers, journalsGranting Certificate of Merit

Granting possibility to attend PhD courses

Granting interesting practice

Results of education

Qualification modelof specialist’s training

CompetenceModel of specialist’s

trainingEvolution shift

Knowledge and skills

COMPETENCEReadiness to apply

Knowledge andPerson’s qualities

• Self-evaluation – to define the level of self-competence• Portfolio of the Graduate: his personal successes in studying

and student’s life are marked (science, culture, sports, social life)

New methods of evaluation of formed professional competence

Correspondence of points from different systems of student’s evaluation

Mark Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Excellent

Traditional 2 2+ 3 3+ 4 5 5+

% Менее 50

51-69 70-75 76-79 80-89 90-95 96-100

ECTS F FX E D C B A

Points 0-3 4-5 6 7 8 9 10

Rating system:

• Serves for development of systematic approach to studying

• Corresponds to renovation of the system of higher education

• Rating system must show not only indicators of professional and scientific skills, but also student’s personal successes

Thank you for attention!