“Is There a “Best” Method for Standard Setting in OSCE Exams? Comparison between Four Methods (A Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study)

Abstract

Background: One of the essential considerations while designing an OSCE exam is “standard-setting”, which refers to the score with which a student could be considered to pass or fail an exam. The selection of proper standard-setting method is based on different criteria, including the applicability of the method, the university bylaws, and the purpose of the test. Objectives: To examine the difference between four different standard-setting methods: the modified Cohen’s, borderline regression, Hofstee methods, and the fixed 60% arbitrary method in determining the passing score in ophthalmology OSCE exam. Methods: Two periodic ophthalmology OSCE were selected to examine the differences in failure rates and pass scores. The four standard setting methods were applied with a sample size that included 38 (year 5 undergraduate) students at the Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University. Results: Modified Cohen’s method resulted in the lowest passing score (54% and 58%), while the Hofstee method led to the highest passing score (69.2% and 75%). Comparing the percentage of students who are supposed to pass the exam, we can observe that there is no statistically significant difference among these standard-setting methods were used except for the Hofstee method. Conclusions: There is no single best method for setting the passing mark of an exam. We could obtain more practical outcomes if we considered more than one method and the average pass mark.