Joint Examination Moderation, Benefits and Challenges; Experience from the Lake Zone and Western Zone Health Training Institutions in Tanzania.
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Initially in Tanzania context, each health training institute in Lake Zone and western zone was conducting its own examination moderation. The ministry of health through all zones has started efforts to establish joint examination moderation as part of the effort to improve examination process.
Objective. To explore about the benefits, and challenges of joint examination moderation in the Lake Zone and western zone of Tanzania
Methods. This research was designed as both quantitative and qualitative studies that made use semi structured questionnaire to collect data among the examination moderators from 15 government health training in Lake Zone and western zone health resources Centre.
Results. All participants were 39 whereby the study reports almost half of the 21/39(53.8%) participants ranked the level of joint moderation to be high in scale.
All of the participants listed many benefits of joint examination moderation including standardization of examination, use of assessment plan and computer skills, team work, and networking. Few challenges were encountered by participants during moderation, including poor setting of examination papers inadequate time for examination moderation, limited related task for semester 1 in the assessment plan. Moreover, submitted incomplete examination papers, lack of reference materials, regular power cut, were other few challenges encountered.
Conclusion: The study has demonstrated high level of joint examination moderation as reported by half of the moderators.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The AJHPE is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Center for Quality Assurance Eastern University of Sri Lanka. Guidelines for examination paper moderation. 2021:1-2.
2. Amer A. Reflections on Bloom’s revised taxonomy. Electron J Res Educ Psychol 2006;4(1):213-230.
3. Ombasa EA. Setting, moderating and marking university examinations: A comparative review of policies from
universities in East Africa and the United Kingdom. Int J Sci Res Pub 2017;14:15.
4. Handa M. Challenges of moderation practices in private training establishments in New Zealand. MD thesis.
Auckland: Unitec Institute of Technology, 2018:1-72.
5. Blom R, F W John, Maree K. Details for: Outcomes-based assessment: facilitating best practice in classrooms / ›
Akademia-biblioteek catalog (accessed 28 July 2024).
6. Bloxham S. Marking and moderation in the UK: False assumptions and wasted resources. Assess Eval High Educ
2009;34(2):209-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/026029308019559787. Adie L, Lloyd M, Beutel D. Identifying discourses of moderation in higher education. Assess Eval High Educ 2013;38(8):968-977. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.769200
8. Suleh EO. Challenges faced by tutors in the setting of examinations. J Educ Pract 2014;17(5):60-74.
9. Rubeba A. Addressing the challenges facing university instructors in test construction practices in Tanzania.
Educ Challenges 2024;29(1):159-174. https://doi.org/10.34142/2709-7986.2024.29.1.11
10. Adie LE. Moderation practices in a faculty of education: The four discourse model. Australian Teacher Education
Association 2013;1-6. https://atea.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2013_adie.pdf
11. Poole B. Moderation: Concept and operationalisation in UK universities. Qual Assur Educ 2022;30(4):464-476.
https://doi.org/10.1108/qae-12-2021-0203
12. The United Republic of Tanzania Ministry of Health, Department of Health Resources. Examination Guideline 2022:112.
13. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today 2004;24(2):105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
14. Rubeba AM, Kitula PR. Quality of joint examinations towards preparing students for standard seven
examinations in Tanzania. 2023:1-15. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2532963/v1
15. Gardner J. Assessment and learning: 2nd ed. London: Sage Pub; 2012:1-8.
16. Health MOF, Development C, Guideline N, Continuous FOR, Improvement Q, Health IN, et al. The United
Republic of Tanzania Ministry of Health Community Development, Gender, Elderly and Children National Guideline for Continuous Quality Improvement in Health Training Institutions. 2018.
17. Irira EM. Effective management of examinations as a way of achieving quality assurance: A case of the Institute of Adult Education ( IAE ). MD dissertation. Dar es Salaam: The Open University of Tanzania, 2014.
18. Akaninwor GIK. Electrical power outages and the teaching and learning process in technical training institutions in Rivers State. Conf NATT Conf, Minna 1998:128-131.
19. Carless D. Trust, distrust and their impact on assessment reform. Assess Eval High Educ 2009;34(1):79-89.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930801895786
20. Suto I, Ireland J. Principles for minimizing errors in examination papers and other educational assessment instruments. Int J Assess Tools Educ 2021;8(2):310-325. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.897874
21. Streatfield D, Markless S. Invisible learning? The contribution of school libraries to teaching and learning. 1994:199-211.