Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts

Original Research

Comparison of conventional viva examination with objective structured viva in second year pathology students

Sharad K Gor, Deepa Budh, Bhalchandra M Athanikar.


Background: The evaluation of students is an important part of any educational process and it is necessary to assess their performance. As a part of feedback for teaching process, it also helps improve the performance. We compared results of conventional viva, structured viva and theory examination.

Aims & Objective: To evaluate the relative contributions of the conventional and structured viva in student assessment.

Materials and Methods: Haematology & clinical pathology table viva were taken for the 2nd MBBS students in GAIMS, Bhuj, Gujarat, by both structured and unstructured pattern. The specific pattern of the structured and unstructured viva was formulated and results compared. The students were also asked the reviews on the viva examinations to assess the acceptability of the students.

Results: There was highly significant correlation (p < 0.01, r=0.52) between results of structured viva and multiple choice questions. Correlation between results of structured viva with remaining theory examination was weaker. Marks of unstructured viva correlated poorly with structured viva, and multiple choice questions.

Conclusion: Structured viva examination correlated better with other formats of examination than conventional viva examination.

Key words: Unstructured Viva; Structured Viva; Conventional Viva; Comparison

Full-text options

Share this Article

Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com

ejPort - eJManager.com
Review(er)s Central
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.