The Objective Structured Clinical Examination and student collusion: marks do not tell the whole truth

Journal of Medical Ethics 32 (12):734-738 (2006)
Kyle Boyd
University of Ottawa
Objective: To determine whether the marks in the third year Objective Structured Clinical Examination were affected by the collusion reported by the students themselves on an electronic discussion board.Design: A review of the student discussion, examiners’ feedback and a comparison of the marks obtained on the 2 days of the OSCE.Participants: 255 third year medical students.Setting: An OSCE consisting of 15 stations, administered on three sites over 2 days at a UK medical school.Results: 40 students contributed to the discussion on the electronic discussion board. The main points raised were perceived inequity between students who did, or did not, have prior knowledge of the station content, and the lack of honesty and professionalism of their peers. Most contributors claimed to have received, or knew of others receiving, prior knowledge, but none confessed to passing on information. No significant difference was observed in the overall mark for the OSCE on day 1 ) and day 2 ). On day 2, marks were considerably greater for four stations and markedly lower for three stations. It was not obvious why collusion should affect these station marks. A clear indication of the effects of collusion could only be obtained from a single subsection of an individual station where 82 students on day 2 incorrectly gave the diagnosis from day 1.Conclusion: Marks do not provide a sound inference of student collusion in an OSCE and may mask the aspects of professional development of students
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1136/jme.2005.015446
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 33,190
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Zitierte Zeichenreihen.Olaf Müller - 1996 - Erkenntnis 44 (3):279 - 304.
Anselm on Truth.Thomas Williams & Sandra Visser - 2005 - In Brian Leftow & Brian Davies (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Anselm. Cambridge University Press. pp. 204-221.
Chronic Vegetative States: Intrinsic Value of Biological Process.Jack P. Freer - 1984 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (4):395-408.
Kant on Truth-Aptness.Alberto Vanzo - 2012 - History and Philosophy of Logic 33 (2):109-126.
Cognitive Expressivism, Faultless Disagreement, and Absolute but Non-Objective Truth.Stephen J. Barker - 2010 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 110 (2pt2):183-199.
What is Clinical Effectiveness?R. Ashcroft - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 33 (2):219-233.


Added to PP index

Total downloads
6 ( #637,971 of 2,242,504 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #410,510 of 2,242,504 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature