Identification-Based Multiple-Choice Assessments in Anatomy can be as Reliable and Challenging as Their Free-Response Equivalents

Multiple-choice (MC) anatomy “spot-tests” (identification-based assessments on tagged cadaveric specimens) offer a practical alternative to traditional free-response (FR) spot-tests. Conversion of the two spot-tests in an upper limb musculoskeletal anatomy unit of study from FR to a novel MC format, where one of five tagged structures on a specimen was the answer to each question, provided a unique opportunity to assess the comparative validity and reliability of FR- and MC-formatted spot-tests and the impact on student performance following the change of test format to MC. Three successive year cohorts of health science students (n = 1,442) were each assessed by spot-tests formatted as FR (first cohort) or MC (following two cohorts). Comparative question difficulty was assessed independently by three examiners. There were more higher-order cognitive skill questions and more of the course objectives tested in the MC-formatted tests. Spot-test reliability was maintained with Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients ≥ 0.80 and 80% of the MC items of high quality (having point-biserial correlation coefficients > 0.25). These results also demonstrated guessing was not an issue. The mean final score for the MC-formatted cohorts increased by 4.9%, but did not change for the final theory examination that was common to all three cohorts. Subgroup analysis revealed that the greatest change in spot-test marks was for the lower-performing students. In conclusion, our results indicate spot-tests formatted as MC are suitable alternatives to FR tests. The increase in mean scores for the MC-formatted spot-tests was attributed to the lower demand of the MC format.     

Protecting academic freedom in changing times: the role of Heads of Departments

In changing times for higher education that are dominated by a neoliberal ideology, we set out to uncover how Heads of Departments (HoDs) perceive their role with respect to supporting their staff and their academic freedom. Freedom to pursue academic research is seen as key to the generation of new knowledge yet it is potentially constrained by funding regimes and university accountability systems. As HoDs operate at the interface between university systems and individual academic projects, how they perceive their role can have a profound influence on the working environment of their departmental staff. The research study is located in two successful departments in a research intensive university in England. The study shows that the HoDs were not captured by the neoliberal discourse and aimed to protect their staff so they could ‘get on with their work’. In so doing they interpreted university demands to the best advantage of their departments but were not active in challenging university driven changes, thus raising questions about the effects of accommodating to change, so risking incremental change, and of how less successful departments might be able to protect their staff and their academic freedom.     

What Brain Research Suggests for Teaching Reading Strategies

How the brain learns to read has been the subject of much neuroscience educational research. Evidence is mounting for identifiable networks of connected neurons that are particularly active during reading processes such as response to visual and auditory stimuli, relating new information to prior knowledge, long-term memory storage, comprehension, and memory retrieval. This article offers strategies that build on current research showing the correlation of brain structure and literacy development, providing interventions for educators.     

The ABC of peer mentoring – what secondary students have to say about cross-age peer mentoring in a regional Australian school

Cross-age peer mentoring is an educational model that builds on peer support and mentoring to assist young people to enhance social relationships, develop cognitive skills, and promote positive identity development. In this article, we outline the evaluation process of a cross-age peer-mentoring program implemented in an Australian secondary school. This program had a distinctive focus on blending cross-age peer mentoring, academic tutoring, and social support roles. We focus on the program's consumers – the voices of Year 7 students (mentees) and Year 10 students (mentors). Student perspectives were gathered using qualitative methods through repeated focus groups. Data were thematically analysed, and the findings show observed changes in social relationships, problem-solving skills, and engagement with literacy. We discuss the importance of this relationship for effective learning and examine the reported changes to engagement with relationship building. Implications for developing whole-of-school support and increasing wider participation are discussed.