A comparison of different standard-setting methods for professional qualifying dental examination.

Abstract

The outcome of assessments is determined by the standard-setting method used. Standard setting is the process of deciding what is good enough. A cutoff score of 50% was commonly used in dental schools in Malaysia. This study aims to compare the conventional, norm-referenced, and modified-Angoff standard-setting methods. The norm-referenced method of standard setting was applied to the real scores of 40 final-year dental students on a multiple-choice question (MCQ), a short answer question (SAQ), and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). A panel of 10 judges set the standard using the modified-Angoff method for the same paper in one sitting. One judge set the passing score of 10 OSCE questions after 2weeks. A comparison of the grades and pass/fail rates derived from the absolute standard, norm-referenced, and modified-Angoff methods was made. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities of the modified-Angoff method were assessed. The passing rate for the absolute standard was 100% (40/40), for the norm-referenced method it was 62.5% (25/40), and for the modified-Angoff method it was 80% (32/40). The modified-Angoff method had good inter-rater reliability of 0.876 and excellent test-retest reliability of 0.941. There were significant differences in the outcomes of these three standard-setting methods, as shown by the difference in the proportion of candidates who passed and failed the assessment. The modified-Angoff method was found to have good reliability for use with a professional qualifying dental examination.