Appendix A
Student Assessment Practices and Procedures
Passed by the Student Assessment Committee: Aug 16th 2012
Preamble
This document outlines the procedures specified by the Student Assessment Committee
(SAC) in order that courses and competencies follow the Student Assessment Policy in
assessing curricular objectives. These procedures are developed by the SAC and
approved by the MD Program Executive Committee. The procedures will be reviewed
annually and revised, as needed, in order to ensure that the policy is followed and
administrative practices run smoothly.
1. Governance of Student Assessment, Policy and Practice.
Practices and procedures in this document will be overseen by the SAC and approved by
the MD Program Executive Committee. The CFRC will be responsible for ensuring that
courses are in compliance with policies and procedures set out by the SAC.
2. Narrative Feedback
As per the Student Assessment Policy section 2.9, narrative description of student
performance must be included as part of the assessment in all courses where studentteacher interaction permits. The process for provision of these narrative assessments must
ensure that they are shared with the student and they are reviewed by the Course Director
or relevant delegate. Instances of deficient performance are referred to the Director of
Academic Advising for review and possible remediation. Instances of outstanding
performance are documented in the student record.
3. Preclerkship Assessment
As stated in the Student Assessment Policy section 3.3, formative assessment must be
present in every course. An assessment plan must be in place for each course and the
schedule of assessment events must be displayed on the course Web site for all students
to see at the start of the term (Student Assessment Policy section 3.4 and 3.5). The Year
Directors will review the assessment schedules of all courses prior to displaying them on
the course Web pages. This review will allow for the coordination of formative
assessment events among courses within each term and facilitate the planned staggering
of assessment events to avoid overloading students with formative assessments and
interfering with their preparation for, and attendance in, other courses.
Across all courses within a term, no more than two assessment events (e.g., assignments,
tests) contributing to final grades will be scheduled within any given week.
In the case of midterm examinations and major assignment deadlines, no more than three
may be scheduled in any given week. (Assignments are considered to be “major” if they
are worth more than 20% of the course grade). Further, during those weeks, no other
formative assessments contributing to course grades should be planned.
Suggested weighting of assessment throughout the term is provided in the following
table:
Distribution Targets Guideline:
Assessment method
Quizzes/lab quizzes
Recommendations Rationale
0-25%
Encourage frequent opportunities
for self-assessment
TBL(team-based
learning)/SGL (small group
learning) mark – individual
Guide studying and ensure
important concepts are learned
TBL/SGL marks – group
Assignments
0-25%
Midterm examinations or unit
tests*
10-25%
Final
examination/assignment*
45-70%
Encourage development of
collaborator and professionalism
competencies. Limit the
contribution of group work to
individual results unless peer
assessment strategies are in place
Encourage alternative methods of
assessment
Provide exposure to exam format,
guide study efforts, reduce
emphasis on final exam
Ensure learning objectives are met
at the end of course. Reduce high
stakes nature of final assessment
*where applicable
4. Examination Procedures - Pre-clerkship and Extended Clerkship Courses
(section 4.0 of Student Assessment Policy)
a) Examination Development
-
As per the Student Assessment Policy section 4.1, examinations will be
constructed according to the course assessment blueprint.
-
The schedule for examination preparation will be set by the Curricular
Coordinators and approved by the Year Directors by beginning of each term. The
schedule will be as follows:
T = exam dates
T minus 1.5 weeks  exams to print
T minus 2.5 weeks  exams to Curricular Coordinators for Final Version
T minus 4 weeks  exam review by SAC rep and Assessment Consultant
T minus 5weeks  all items to Curricular Coordinators
b) Post-examination review
-
-
-
Technical reports of the final examinations will be distributed to the Course
Director and SAC term representative prior to the Examiners’ meeting to allow
for any necessary adjustments to the exam results.
Technical analysis of the examination will consist of descriptive statistics (Mean,
Standard Deviation, Standard Error of the Mean, Range) and estimates of
reliability, i.e., Cronbach’s Alpha. Item analysis will consist of item difficulty and
biserial correlation. If items are deleted from the exam based on this review,
marks will be calculated prior to the Examiners’ meeting. A list of deleted items
will be given to the Curricular Coordinator for removal from the Question Bank
until revision of the questions has been done.
Review of examination difficulty will consist of comparing the descriptive
statistics to those from the exams of previous years and across courses within the
term and looking at the statistics of old questions versus new.
c) Examiners’ meeting
-
-
-
-
As per the Student Assessment Policy section 4.4, each term will have an
Examiners’ meeting. The meeting should be attended by all Course Directors for
the term, an SAC representative, the Year Director and representatives from
FSGL, Clinical Skills and the Competency Leads or designates for each of these.
The meeting will be scheduled by the Curricular Coordinator.
Complete and finalized course marks will be circulated in a secure manner to the
Course Director, Year Director and SAC representative for review prior to the
Examiners’ meeting.
Student results will be reviewed. Any students with poor or failing performance
will be reviewed as per the Student Assessment Policy section 6.0. Review of
individual student performance will include, but is not limited to, course marks,
small group learning attendance and other competency role data.
Recommendations will be taken to the Progress and Promotions Committee.
A course report including the above statistical information, a review of processes
during the term and the de-identified results of the Examiners’ meeting, including
recommendations made to the Progress and Promotions Committee, will be made
to the SAC by the SAC term representative.
-
In the case of the extended clerkship courses, exam review will be done by the
Course Director, the Extended Clerkship Curriculum Director and the SAC term
representative.
5. Clerkship Assessment (further development required)
Locally developed examinations used in clerkship will undergo the same development
and review procedures as in the preclerkship courses.


Portfolio assessment will be developed in conjunction with the Competency
Committee.
Clinical Skills and FSGL assessment will be developed in conjunction with the
appropriate stakeholders.