Skip to main content
Fig. 2 | BMC Medical Education

Fig. 2

From: Modifying Hofstee standard setting for assessments that vary in difficulty, and to determine boundaries for different levels of achievement

Fig. 2

a-c Examples of applying the modified Hofstee protocol to the cumulative frequency curves of student cohort performance in MCQ-style assessments: a module 2; b module 10; c module 11. Modules 2 and 10 have a University pass mark of 40 % whereas module 11 has a University pass mark of 50 %; all three modules have a University first class/distinction mark of 70 %. d-f The frequency distributions of student performance in the same three assessments comparing the outcomes given by FS/CFG (dashed curves) and the MH protocol (solid curves) following moderation (‘cranking’) to the University scales – 40 %/70 % for modules 2 (d) and 10 (e), and 50 %/70 % for module 11 (f)

Back to article page

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

Contact us