THE OBJECTIVES ASSESSMENT GUIDANCE OF THE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGIC EXAMINATION

PREFACE

 “Is the Candidate mark objective and transparent, valid and reliable in orthopaedics and traumatologic examination without prejudices and disparities?”

I always reflect this interesting examination question during ten years’ experience in the Indonesian National Board Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Examiner. Because of the Examiners are able to initiate an interesting topic knowledge or skill question of the scenario independently. This question stimulates me to solve the problem. Therefore, I think all the Examiners should be able to make a similar perception to evaluate the learning objectives of the examination.

I attempt to design the objectives examination assessment guidance of the orthopaedics and traumatologic examination including:

1. Part A: The objectives evaluation of the history taking, physical examination and investigation findings data collection for some possibilities or accurate diagnosis determination.
2. Part B: The objectives examination evaluation of the patient’s problem, management and complications.
3. Part C: The objectives examination evaluation of a good Candidate’s attitude and professionalism.
4. Marks every objective depends on the Examiners consensus meeting before orthopaedic and traumatologic examination. Example total marks of part A is 30 because of knowledge and skill of general physician competence; part B is 60; its more orthopaedics and traumatologic specialized and part C is 10. Therefore the total Candidate marks is part A + part B + part C.

I hope my suggestion is to provide a framework of the Examiners evaluation in orthopaedics and traumatologic examination of the Candidate for achieving the same perception. I also appreciate Indonesian Orthopaedics and Traumatologic Collegium Course to effort the similarity of mark value evaluation in Candidate examination without prejudice or disparities. The aim of this draft is to improve the Candidate marks in examination and for improvement of objectives assessment by the Examiners.

I believe this draft is still minimal information and also some statements which I wrote are disagreed because of bias or errors and limitation in education information. Therefore, I invite some suggestions or comments and constructive criticism for improving Candidates Evaluation of the Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Examination objectively.

Jogjakarta, June 2015

Prof. Armis

Orthopaedics and Traumatology department

Faculty of Medicine, UGM