Search

Background: The outcome of assessments is determined by the standard‐setting method used. Standard setting is the process of deciding what is good enough. A cutoff score of 50% was commonly used in dental schools in Malaysia. This study aims to compare the conventional, norm‐referenced, and modified‐Angoff standard‐setting methods. Methods: The norm‐referenced method of standard setting was applied to the real scores of 40 final‐year dental students on a multiple‐choice question (MCQ), a short answer question (SAQ), and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). A panel of 10 judges set the standard using the modified‐Angoff method for the same paper in one sitting. One judge set the passing score of 10 OSCE questions after 2 weeks. A comparison of the grades and pass/fail rates derived from the absolute standard, norm‐referenced, and modified‐Angoff methods was made. The intra‐rater and inter‐rater reliabilities of the modified‐Angoff method were assessed. Results: The passing rate for the absolute standard was 100% (40/40), for the norm‐referenced method it was 62.5% (25/40), and for the modified‐Angoff method it was 80% (32/40). The modified‐Angoff method had good inter‐rater reliability of 0.876 and excellent test–retest reliability of 0.941. Conclusion: There were significant differences in the outcomes of these three standard‐setting methods, as shown by the difference in the proportion of candidates who passed and failed the assessment. The modified‐Angoff method was found to have good reliability for use with a professional qualifying dental examination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]