Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions

Technical report

Development of examination objectives based on nursing competency for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination: a validity study: Sujin Shin, Gwang Suk Kim, Jun-Ah Song, Inyoung Lee; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2022;19:19. Published online August 22, 2022; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2022.19.19

2,066 View
199 Download
3 Web of Science
3 Crossref

Purpose
This study aimed to develop the examination objectives based on nursing competency of the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination.
Methods
This is a validity study to develop the examination objectives based on nursing competency. Data were collected in December 2021. We reviewed the literature related to changing nurse roles and on the learning objectives for the Korea Medical Licensing Examination and other health personnel licensing examinations. Thereafter, we created a draft of the nursing problems list for examination objectives based on the literature review, and the content validity was evaluated by experts. A final draft of the examination objectives is presented and discussed.
Results
A total of 4 domains, 12 classes, and 85 nursing problems for the Korean Nursing Liscensing Examination were developed. They included the essentials of objectives, related factors, evaluation goals, related activity statements, related clients, related settings, and specific outcomes.
Conclusion
This study developed a draft of the examination objectives based on clinical competency that were related to the clinical situations of nurses and comprised appropriate test items for the licensing examination. Above results may be able to provide fundamental data for item development that reflects future nursing practices.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

A validity study of COMLEX-USA Level 3 with the new test design
Xia Mao, John R. Boulet, Jeanne M. Sandella, Michael F. Oliverio, Larissa Smith
Journal of Osteopathic Medicine.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
A Survey on Perceptions of the Direction of Korean Medicine Education and National Licensing Examination
Han-Byul Cho, Won-Suk Sung, Jiseong Hong, Yeonseok Kang, Eun-Jung Kim
Healthcare.2023; 11(12): 1685. CrossRef
Suggestion for item allocation to 8 nursing activity categories of the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination: a survey-based descriptive study
Kyunghee Kim, So Young Kang, Younhee Kang, Youngran Kweon, Hyunjung Kim, Youngshin Song, Juyeon Cho, Mi-Young Choi, Hyun Su Lee
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 18. CrossRef

Research article

Using the Angoff method to set a standard on mock exams for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination: Mi Kyoung Yim, Sujin Shin; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2020;17:14. Published online April 22, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2020.17.14

7,659 View
195 Download
7 Web of Science
6 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

Purpose
This study explored the possibility of using the Angoff method, in which panel experts determine the cut score of an exam, for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination (KNLE). Two mock exams for the KNLE were analyzed. The Angoff standard setting procedure was conducted and the results were analyzed. We also aimed to examine the procedural validity of applying the Angoff method in this context.
Methods
For both mock exams, we set a pass-fail cut score using the Angoff method. The standard setting panel consisted of 16 nursing professors. After the Angoff procedure, the procedural validity of establishing the standard was evaluated by investigating the responses of the standard setters.
Results
The descriptions of the minimally competent person for the KNLE were presented at the levels of general and subject performance. The cut scores of first and second mock exams were 74.4 and 76.8, respectively. These were higher than the traditional cut score (60% of the total score of the KNLE). The panel survey showed very positive responses, with scores higher than 4 out of 5 points on a Likert scale.
Conclusion
The scores calculated for both mock tests were similar, and were much higher than the existing cut scores. In the second simulation, the standard deviation of the Angoff rating was lower than in the first simulation. According to the survey results, procedural validity was acceptable, as shown by a high level of confidence. The results show that determining cut scores by an expert panel is an applicable method.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Comparing Estimated and Real Item Difficulty Using Multi-Facet Rasch Analysis
Ayfer SAYIN, Sebahat GÖREN
Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi.2023; 14(4): 440. CrossRef
Application of computer-based testing in the Korean Medical Licensing Examination, the emergence of the metaverse in medical education, journal metrics and statistics, and appreciation to reviewers and volunteers
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 2. CrossRef
Possibility of using the yes/no Angoff method as a substitute for the percent Angoff method for estimating the cutoff score of the Korean Medical Licensing Examination: a simulation study
Janghee Park
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 23. CrossRef
Development of examination objectives based on nursing competency for the Korean Nursing Licensing Examination: a validity study
Sujin Shin, Gwang Suk Kim, Jun-Ah Song, Inyoung Lee
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 19. CrossRef
Possibility of independent use of the yes/no Angoff and Hofstee methods for the standard setting of the Korean Medical Licensing Examination written test: a descriptive study
Do-Hwan Kim, Ye Ji Kang, Hoon-Ki Park
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2022; 19: 33. CrossRef
Comparing the cut score for the borderline group method and borderline regression method with norm-referenced standard setting in an objective structured clinical examination in medical school in Korea
Song Yi Park, Sang-Hwa Lee, Min-Jeong Kim, Ki-Hwan Ji, Ji Ho Ryu
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 25. CrossRef

Research Article

Validation of a clinical critical thinking skills test in nursing: Sujin Shin, Dukyoo Jung, Sungeun Kim; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2015;12:1. Published online January 27, 2015; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2015.12.1

35,250 View
287 Download
5 Web of Science
9 Crossref

Abstract PDF

Purpose
The purpose of this study was to develop a revised version of the clinical critical thinking skills test (CCTS) and to subsequently validate its performance. Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of the CCTS. Data were obtained from a convenience sample of 284 college students in June 2011. Thirty items were analyzed using item response theory and test reliability was assessed. Test-retest reliability was measured using the results of 20 nursing college and graduate school students in July 2013. The content validity of the revised items was analyzed by calculating the degree of agreement between instrument developer intention in item development and the judgments of six experts. To analyze response process validity, qualitative data related to the response processes of nine nursing college students obtained through cognitive interviews were analyzed. Results: Out of initial 30 items, 11 items were excluded after the analysis of difficulty and discrimination parameter. When the 19 items of the revised version of the CCTS were analyzed, levels of item difficulty were found to be relatively low and levels of discrimination were found to be appropriate or high. The degree of agreement between item developer intention and expert judgments equaled or exceeded 50%. Conclusion: From above results, evidence of the response process validity was demonstrated, indicating that subjects respondeds as intended by the test developer. The revised 19-item CCTS was found to have sufficient reliability and validity and will therefore represents a more convenient measurement of critical thinking ability.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Meta-analysis in Physical Therapy Education Research
Mitch Wolden, Brent Hill, Sara Farquhar Voorhees
Journal of Physical Therapy Education.2019; 33(1): 78. CrossRef
Effects of a work-based critical reflection program for novice nurses
Yeon Hee Kim, Ja Min, Soon Hee Kim, Sujin Shin
BMC Medical Education.2018;[Epub] CrossRef
Measurement of critical thinking, clinical reasoning, and clinical judgment in culturally diverse nursing students – A literature review
Christine L. Sommers
Nurse Education in Practice.2018; 30: 91. CrossRef
Individual and School Factors Affecting Critical Thinking Ability among Nursing Students
Sujin Shin, Inhee Park, Eunhee Hwang, Dukyoo Jung, Kon Hee Kim
Korean Medical Education Review.2018; 20(1): 44. CrossRef
The Health Professions Education Pathway: Preparing Students, Residents, and Fellows to Become Future Educators
H. Carrie Chen, Maria A. Wamsley, Amin Azzam, Katherine Julian, David M. Irby, Patricia S. O'Sullivan
Teaching and Learning in Medicine.2017; 29(2): 216. CrossRef
Cultivating Critical Thinking Using Virtual Interactive Case Studies
Susan M. Burke
Journal of Pediatric Nursing.2017; 33: 94. CrossRef
Encouraging Critical Clinical Thinking (CCT) Skills in First-Year Veterinary Students
Duncan C. Ferguson, Leslie Klis McNeil, David J. Schaeffe, Eric M. Mills
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education.2017; 44(3): 531. CrossRef
Developing a Foundation for Interprofessional Education Within Nursing and Medical Curricula
Trisha Leann Horsley, Trent Reed, Keith Muccino, Donna Quinones, Viva Jo Siddall, Janet McCarthy
Nurse Educator.2016; 41(5): 234. CrossRef
Supervision in psychiatry
Joanna MacDonald, Pete M. Ellis
Current Opinion in Psychiatry.2012; 25(4): 322. CrossRef

First
Prev
Page of 1
Next
Last

Search