EditorialJournal of Pharmacology and PharmacotherapeuticsVol. 7 | Issue 3 | 2016 | pp. 115–116Open access
The three Rs of written assessment: The JIPMER experience
- ,
- *
Published in Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics
Correspondence: Gitanjali B
Email: gitabatman@gmail.com
Copyright: © 2016 Manuscript Technomedia LLP. This is an open access article.
- Published:
- Jan 1, 2016
How to cite
S, M., & B, G. (2016). The three Rs of written assessment: The JIPMER experience. Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics, 7(3), 115–116. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.189650
Abstract
Written assessment has stood the test of time and is widely practiced from elementary school to higher education. Medicine is not an exception and written exams are the main mode of assessing knowledge (cognitive domain) in formative and summative assessments. School education in India is much oriented towards the reproduction of knowledge rather than translation of knowledge. Hence, bright, curious, children are transformed to dull, indifferent parrots in school who get selected for various professional courses based on their ability to remember and reproduce facts. This concept of assessment is well conserved across different levels of education including medical education. The present assessment pattern in medical colleges, both undergraduate and postgraduate, maintains this status quo as we continue to expect students to cram stuff and reproduce it verbatim. This has also changed the way students learn the subject. Most of the students have now switched to third rated notes available in the market with only a very few reading standard textbooks. If we have to produce students who can analyze, think effectively, and treat patients appropriately, we need to change the way our students learn and the content of what they learn. The only effective way to do this is to change the way we assess them.
Keywords
Subject
Article metadata
| Title | The three Rs of written assessment: The JIPMER experience |
|---|---|
| Authors | Manikandan S; Gitanjali B |
| Corresponding author | gitabatman@gmail.com |
| Journal | Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics |
| Volume / Issue | Vol. 7, Issue 3 (2016) |
Also in this issue
- What failed BIA 10–2474 Phase I clinical trial? Global speculations and recommendations for future Phase I trialspp. 120–121
- Phenytoin‑induced toxic epidermal necrolysis: Review and recommendationspp. 127–132
- Deprescription: The prescription metabolismpp. 133–137
- Cold sodium chloride solution 0.9% and infrared thermography can be an alternative to radiopaque contrast agents in phlebographypp. 138–9
- Cisplatin resistance reversal by disulfiram and caffeinepp. 139–141
Readers Also Viewed
Development and Validation of UV/visible Spectrophotometric Method for Estimation of Piroxicam from Bulk and Formulation
Sandip Mohan Honmane, Kunal Rajaram Yadav, Yuvraj Dilip Dange
Apr 23, 2025
Effects of Artificial Intelligence on Academic Performance of Library and Information Science University Students: A Meta-Analysis (2023-2025)
Kayode Sunday John Dada
Aug 6, 2026
Bridging Innovation and Impact: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Contemporary Research Challenges
Mueen Ahmed KK
Aug 11, 2026