JADE 6th edition | Page 46

46 | JADE NAZIM ALI In week 2, students tackle the investigative methods and diagnosis of cancer. Students are expected to know the various terminologies associated with cancer to be able to document and gather information according to standard guidelines. Thus the set ILO to this requires students to ‘Describe the basic classification of tumours’. Analysing the ILOs of the PBL groups for week 2 shows that 8 groups out of the 12 groups listed this as one of their ILOs. Given that this equates to approximately 37% of the student cohort who did not emphasise this ILO as core knowledge, a test item on the topic becomes unfeasible. This clearly challenges the notion of constructive alignment in the cancer module and becomes an important point for me to consider in the redevelopment of the module. Assessments of the cancer module Assessment is an integral part of a module and its importance is recognised by the QAA which defines the purpose of assessment as a tool: 1) to pr omote learning and 2) provide a means to measure the extent of learning achieved by students against the ILOs of a module. In accordance with the pedagogy of constructive alignment, assessment materials should be designed in such way which tells us how well students have succeeded in meeting the module’s ILOs. Thus assessments should closely track the outcomes of the curriculum in order to drive learning. The assessment of the module is undertaken using a range of items which includes written and practical work. Grounded in sound medical educational research, the selection of the test items follows the framework of Miller’s Pyramid (Miller 1990). As detailed in Figure 3, the ‘knows’ forms the base of the pyramid which tests students factual knowledge. This acts as the foundation upon which clinical competence can be built upon. At the second layer of the pyramid students are expected to apply their acquired knowledge and this can be examined by students’ ability to solve problems. The ‘knows’ and ‘knows how’ are deemed suitable categories for assessing Year 1 students utilising both written and practical assessments (Wass 2001). The top two layers: ‘shows’ and ‘does’ are designated for students to demonstrate their competencies in simulated or actual clinical settings and is generally assessed beyond Year 2. Here I consider the extent to which the assessments of the module aid students in their learning. My evaluation takes into account the several criteria proposed by Brown (Brown 2004) as strategies to transform assessment into a learning force. A critical factor is the timing of assessment. Assessment of the module is undertaken