PREDICTIVE ABILITY AND STAKEHOLDERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE SELECTION TOOLS FOR MBBS IN WOMEN MEDICAL COLLEGE: A MIXED METHODS STUDY
AbstractBackground: The selection criteria for entry into the MBBS programme used by Women Medical College (WMC) includes previous academic achievements, namely Secondary School Certificate (SSC) and Higher Secondary Certificate (HSC), and the Medical and Dental College Admission Test (MDCAT). This study determined the predictive validity of these selection tools and explored the perceptions of stakeholders regarding the selection process and the use of selection tools in WMC. Methods: This study utilized both quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative methods involved a retrospective cohort study design to determine the statistical correlation between the performance of candidates in the selection tools and their subsequent academic achievements at medical college. This consisted of data collected from three cohorts (n=186) of students who graduated in 2014, 2015 and 2016. Qualitative methods of the study explored the perceptions of stakeholders through purposive sampling using face-to-face semi-structured interviews, which were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The study showed very weak correlations of SSC with performance in the fourth professional examination undertaken by the students and HSC with performance inthe first andsecond professional examinations. MDCAT did not correlate with any professional examination. Qualitative analysis identified three emerging themes; a) lack of standardization, b) fairness of selection criteria, and c) assessment of non-cognitive attributes. Conclusion: The selection tools showed poor predictive ability for the performance of students in the medical college. Standardizing the selection tools and including an assessment of non-cognitive attributes in the selection criteria is suggested.Keywords: Medical College; Admission Criteria; Selection Tools; Predictive Validity; Perceptions
Shulruf B, Poole P, Wang GY, Rudland J, Wilkinson T. How well do selection tools predict performance later in a medical programme? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2012;17(5):615–26.
Patterson F, Ferguson E, Knight AL. Selection into medical education and training. In: Swanwick T, editor. Understanding Medical Education: Evidence, Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 2014; p.403–20.
Shulruf B, Hattie J, Tumen S. A dual Admission Policy Enhancing Equal Opportunities in Higher Education through Merit-Based Admission Policy. High Educ Equal Oppor Cross-Natl Perspect 2010:315.
Mercer A, Puddey IB. Admission selection criteria as predictors of outcomes in an undergraduate medical course: A prospective study. Med Teach 2011;33(12):997–1004.
Wilkinson D, Zhang J, Byrne GJ, Luke H, Ozolins IZ, Parker MH, et al. Medical school selection criteria and the prediction of academic performance. Med J Aust 2008;188(6):349–54.
Ali A, Ali Z. Admission Policy of Medical Colleges: Evaluating Validity of Admission Test in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. J Res Reflect Educ 2013;7(1):77–88.
Khan JS, Biggs JS, Bano T, Mukhtar O, Tabasum S, Mubasshar MH. Medical colleges admission test in Punjab, Pakistan. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2013;25(1-2):64–7.
Pakistan Medical & Dental Council. Admission Regulation 2019 [Internet]. [cited 2019 April]. Available from: http://www.pmdc.org.pk/portals/0/PM&DC%20Regulation%202018/Admission%20Regulation%202018%2031-1-19.pdf
Khan JS, Mukhtar O, Tabasum S. Predictive validity of medical and dental colleges' entrance test in Punjab: the way forward. J Pak Med Assoc 2014;64(10):1132–7.
Mufti TS, Kifayatullah, Qayum I. Rehman Medical College admission criteria as an indicator of students' performance in university professional examinations. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2014;26(4):564–7.
Turner R, Nicholson S. Can the UK Clinical Aptitude Test (UKCAT) select suitable candidates for interview? Med Educ 2011;45(10):1041–7.
Albanese MA, Snow MH, Skochelak SE, Huggett KN, Farrell PM. Assessing personal qualities in medical school admissions. Acad Med 2003;78(3):313–21.
Hojat M, Erdmann JB, Veloski JJ, Nasca TJ, Callahan CA, Julian E, et al. A validity study of the writing sample section of the Medical College Admission Test. Acad Med 2000;75(10):S25–7.
Kreiter C, Yin P, Solow C, Brennan R. Investigating the reliability of the medical school admissions interview. Adv Health Sci Educ 2004;9(2):147–59.
Goho J, Blackman A. The effectiveness of academic admission interviews: an exploratory meta-analysis. Med Teach 2006;28(4):335–40.
McAndrew R, Ellis J, Valentine RA. Does a selection interview predict year 1 performance in dental school? Eur J Dent Educ 2017;21(2):108–12.
Katz S, Vinker S. New non-cognitive procedures for medical applicant selection: a qualitative analysis in one school. BMC Med Educ 2014;14:237.
McLarnon MJW, Rothstein MG, Goffin RD, Rieder MJ, Poole A, Krajewski HT, et al. How important is personality in the selection of medical school students? Personal Individ Differ 2017;104:442–7.
Husbands A, Dowell J. Predictive validity of the Dundee multiple mini-interview. Med Educ 2013;47(7):717–25.
Walton HJ. World summit on medical education and continuing education. J Contin Educ Health Prof 1995;15(1):40–7.
Muñoz N, Barraza R, Pérez C, Ortiz L. Rethinking the selection of medical students, considering non-cognitive skills. Rev Med Chil 2015;143(10):1337–42.
Sedgwick P. Retrospective cohort studies: advantages and disadvantages. BMJ 2014;348:g1072.
Frankfort-Nachmias C, Nachmias D. Research methods in the social sciences. 4th ed. London: Edward Arnold; 1992.
Lodico MG, Spaulding DT, Voegtle KH, Dawson B. Methods in educational research: from theory to practice. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons; 2010.
Cohen L, Mansion L, Morrison K. Research methods in education. 8th ed. New York: Routledge; 2018.
Allen RES, Wiles JL. A rose by any other name: Participants choosing research pseudonyms. Qual Res Psychol 2016;13(2):149–65.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006;3(2):77–101.
Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.
USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.