目的:大多数健康素养措施依赖于主观的自我评估。关于健康测试的批判性思维是一项客观措施,其中包括针对中学教育资源中包含的九个知情健康选择关键概念中的每一个的两个多项选择题(MCQ)。这项研究的目的是确定及格(具有和不具有基本理解和应用九个概念的能力之间的界限)和掌握(掌握和不掌握它们之间的界限)的界限。
方法:使用两种广泛使用的方法的组合:Angoff\和Nedelsky\,一个小组判断了一个人在通过的边界上和另一个人在掌握了概念的边界上正确回答每个MCQ的可能性。通过总结正确回答每个MCQ的概率来确定截止分数。对他们的独立评估进行了总结和讨论。使用名义组技术达成共识。
方法:本研究在东非的中学进行。
方法:该小组包括在以下领域具有5年或以上经验的8名个人:评估批判性思维干预措施,课程开发,初中教学和循证决策。
结果:小组同意,对于及格分数,学生必须回答18个问题中的9个,并获得精通分数,18个问题中的14个正确。
结论:个别小组成员对许多问题的判断差异很大,但是经过讨论,他们很快就就截止分数达成了共识。
Most health literacy measures rely on subjective self-assessment. The Critical Thinking about Health Test is an objective measure that includes two multiple-choice questions (MCQs) for each of the nine Informed Health Choices Key Concepts included in the educational resources for secondary schools. The objective of this study was to determine cut-off scores for passing (the border between having and not having a basic understanding and the ability to apply the nine concepts) and mastery (the border between having mastered and not having mastered them).
Using a combination of two widely used methods: Angoff\'s and Nedelsky\'s, a panel judged the likelihood that an individual on the border of passing and another on the border of having mastered the concepts would answer each MCQ correctly. The cut-off scores were determined by summing up the probability of answering each MCQ correctly. Their independent assessments were summarised and discussed. A nominal group technique was used to reach a
consensus.
The study was conducted in secondary schools in East Africa.
The panel included eight individuals with 5 or more years\' experience in the following areas: evaluation of critical thinking interventions, curriculum development, teaching of lower secondary school and evidence-informed decision-making.
The panel agreed that for a passing score, students had to answer 9 of the 18 questions and for a mastery score, 14 out of 18 questions correctly.
There was wide variation in the judgements made by individual panel members for many of the questions, but they quickly reached a
consensus on the cut-off scores after discussions.