Sharing Videos on the iFolio

During the curriculum review last Wednesday, I heard many lecturers wanting to share videos with their students through the iFolio. So to help everyone, I come up with this post.

First and foremost, we do not upload the video into the ifolio. Instead we upload the video elsewhere such as YouTube, then share the video via a Web2.0 link on ifolio by embedding it.

  1. You need a YouTube account. If you have a Google account, then you already have a YouTube account. Just log in using the same username and password.
  2. Click the “Upload” button on the top right of the screen and you will get screen below.upload
  3. You have 3 options, either Public (everyone can search and view), Unlisted (only those with the link can view) or Private (only the video owner can view). As lecturers who wants to share the video only with your students on ifolio, please select “Unlisted”.

    upload-video

  4. Select the video that you want to upload and click “Open”. Please make sure that your video is only 10 minutes long. Since as new users, you are only allowed to upload a video that long. Once you have verified your account by entering the code sent to your handphone, you can upload longer video files. The longest video that I have uploaded to YouTube was 1 hour 45 minutes long.

    descriptions

  5. You will get the above requester. Fill up the “Basic Info” about the video as shown above. Once done, click the “Done” button. Leave your computer and browser running on the same page until YouTube finished processing your video.

    link-to-paste

  6. You will get the above page when YouTube finished processing your video. Copy the video link (i.e. https://youtu.be/………).
  7. Now log-in into ifolio using your staff id and eWarga password. Go to the module that you want to share the video with. Usually I share the video at “Tasks” or “Discussions”. In the example below, it is under “Tasks” as an assignment.
    embed-video
  8. Create “Tasks” the usual way, fill up the boxes as shown above. Then insert the video by clicking on the YouTube icon as circled in red in the the above picture.
  9. In the next requester, fill up URL that you copied from the YouTube site earlier.
    insert-web2.0
  10. Once you click “Insert”, you will get the following image. Instead of the video, you will see the flash icon in its place.

    view-in-form

  11. Click on the “Save” button and you will see the video  listed on the “Tasks” page, as shown below.

    tasks

  12. So now if your students visits the “Tasks” page, your students will see the video, as shown below.

view-video

It looks like this;

Congrats! You’re done!

How to Print Your Blended Learning Certificate

1. Open up your browser and enter “http://ifolio.ukm.my/report/blended/” in the address bar.
2. Select your faculty, i.e. Faculty of Medicine.

Select your faculty

Select your faculty


3. Select the semester i.e. Semester 1 2015/2016.
Select the semester.

Select the semester.


4. Click on your course i.e. FK6163 Asas Statistik Perubatan Set 1.
Click on your course.

Click on your course.


5. Click on the blue Certificate button besides your name.
Click on the blue button.

Click on the blue button.


6. Save or print the e-Certificate.
The e-certificate.

The e-certificate.


7. Repeat for all the courses that you taught in that semester.
e-Certs for Semester 1 2015/2016

e-Certs for Semester 1 2015/2016

Google Scholar Citations for PPUKM Lecturers

Tags

Please go to Google Scholar at http://scholar.google.com and log in using your official PPUKM email account (i.e. drtamil@ppukm.ukm.edu.my). You can also use any other Google account but it would be easier using the PPUKM account since it would require verification of your official (i.e. PPUKM) email.

Please click on “My Citations” or on this LINK to start. It will open a new window so that you can work on it while reading through the instructions.

Google Scholar Citations provide a simple way for authors to keep track of citations to their articles. You can check who is citing your publications, graph citations over time, and compute several citation metrics. To start filling up the information, please click on the “Get Started With Google Scholar Citations” button.

gs-1-buttonYou will get the following page. Please fill up the form with the required information. Then click on Next.

gs-2-form1Find articles that you’ve written and add them to your profile. Later, you can edit or delete the articles in your profile or add more articles to your profile.

gs-3-articlesAfter you added the articles, you will see the following page;

gs-4-articlesaddedNow click on Next and choose the options on how you want the articles list to be updated, as illustrated below. Once done, click on “Get to my profile”.

gs-4-optionYou will see your profile, please click on the “Make my profile public” button. Once done, it will display “My profile is public”.

gs-6-profilePlease take note of the Google Scholar ID in the address bar. For example, my id is “kcd5yXQAAAAJ”. Please pass this ID to Sekretariat Penyelidikan Perubatan & Inovasi (SPPI) before 18th September 2015. Please submit your Google Scholar ID via this Google Form.

gs-7-idGoogle Scholar H-index is higher than the Experts Scival H-index, as illustrated below.

gs-7-expertscival

Avoiding Copy Paste Errors While Merging Marks

Tags

Part 5

Faculty of Medicine UKM is unique since we have students from various franchises beside our own students. They also have their own unique set of matriculation numbers as demonstrated below;

  • UKM – The letter A followed by 6 digits, i.e. AXXXXXX (A123456)
  • UNPAD-UKM – Initially the letter G followed by 5 digits. Now changed since the 2012 intake to the letter GA followed by 4 digits i.e. GAXXXX (GA1234).
  • AUCMS-UKM – This has gone through 3 changes. Initially the letter M followed by 6 digits (M123456). Then BMD followed by 7 digits (BMD1234567) for 2012 intake but later reduced to 6 digits after the fiasco during end-module examination in 2012. Now that AUCMS no longer exists since January 2015, the students’ matriculation numbers follow the UKM-UNPAD numbering system; the letter GA followed by 4 digits i.e. GAXXXX (GA1234).

Weirdly enough, the OMR forms does not support all these variety of matriculation numbering system. The OBA forms only allow for a single alphabet, followed by 6 numbers (i.e. A123456).

The OBA OMR form.

The OBA OMR form.

The EMI forms only allow for 6 digits and no alphabet (i.e.123456).

The EMI form.

The EMI form.

So the poor students started having problems filling up the OMR forms. For the UKM-AUCMS students with BMD prefix, they have been told to use only the M prefix.

For the UKM-UNPAD students, they have been told to use only the G prefix and to add two zeros before their own digits i.e. G001234. Instead some of them had been using the A prefix or omitting from marking any of the letters at all. As for the numbers, instead of adding the zeros before their numbers, a few had been adding the zeros after their own matric numbers, i.e. G012340 or G123400.

This will cause havoc for the course/posting coordinators who are trying to tabulate and merge the marks from the various components of the examination. When you have 171 students per posting, it is very hard to detect the mistakes visually, therefore we need a good system and help in highlighting the errors.

This blog post aim to do just that, to demonstrate one such method that will help in detecting the errors.

Caveat (Warning)
The students marks are confidential, therefore the data used in the demonstration here are NOT REAL MARKS! Therefore do not try to postulate anything from these marks or discussion. These are just dummy data.

In the following demonstration, we will will show you on how to merge the OBA and EMI marks.

Data Preparation

Both OBA & EMI data must be sorted in ascending order, taking into account of the alphabets. Since the alphabets will distort the sorting, we have to remove the letters in the OBA matric numbers, so that it will match the matric numbers for EMI marks.

So we first duplicate the matric number column by using the the copy paste command.

Duplicate OBA matric number.

Now we select the column B.

Select column B by clicking on top of column B.

Select column B by clicking on top of column B.

Then we remove the alphabets in column B by using the Find & Replace command by pressing Ctrl & F or Shift & F5. First we remove the letter B, followed by H and P.

Replace the letter B with nothing, then click "Replace All".

Replace the letter B with nothing, then click “Replace All”.

Can you see all the letter B replaced with nothing?

Can you see all the letter B replaced with nothing?

Now repeat for all the other letters. In this example, for the letters H & P.

Now repeat for all the other letters. In this example, for the letters B, H & P have been replaced with nothing.

Merging the Two Datasets; OBA & EMI

Now the OBA matric numbers are similar as those matric numbers in EMI. Now we can proceed merging these two data sets.

First we sort the OBA data using column B.

Sort the OBA data using column B.

Then we sort the EMI data using the matric numbers.

Sort EMI data using the matric numbers.

Sort EMI data using the matric numbers.

Now we copy and paste the EMI data into the OBA spreadsheet.

Copy the EMI data into the OBA spreadsheet.

Immediately we noticed the mismatched matric numbers since the students were using different matric numbers for OBA & EMI. The zeros were in a different place for both examinations i.e. OBA using B001170 versus EMI using 011700.

To help identify all the mismatched matric numbers, in cell F2, we will type “=D2-B2”. Then “drag and fill” the rest of the column. If the matric numbers do not match, then the value will not be zero. Then we we can highlight the respective cells that do not match.

Get the difference between the matric numbers. Highlight the non-zero cells.

Then we start from the top. We will cut out or insert cells to match the matric numbers.

Cut out errors and paste them aside.

Insert blank space to push cells down to match matric numbers.

After all that hard work, we are rewarded with the following scenario; all the matric numbers matched except for these 7 matric numbers.

After cutting out and inserting cells, we are left with 6 non-matching matric numbers.

After cutting out and inserting cells, we are left with 7 non-matching matric numbers.

Then we can deduce which marks belong to whom, based on the matric numbers arrangement.

Cuba teka, siapa saya? Deducing which marks belong to whom.

Finally they found each other. How sweet!

Once done, just sort the data again in ascending order by the matric numbers so that you can merge it with the other marks from the examination i.e. KFQ & OSCE.

Personally I would also check the alphabets. All 7 guilty of entering the wrong matric number seems to have similar number of digits. Therefore they should share the same alphabet.

Conclusion

The medical students may be the crème de la crème of the Malaysian education system, but some of them are not bright enough to mark their own matriculation number correctly. Sometimes you wonder how come they get to do medicine?

Reliability of Examination Questions – Implication of a Large Failure Rate

Tags

, , , ,

Part 3

This article is the third in this series of assessing validity & reliability of examination questions. The first two were published earlier last week in the same blog. Kindly read these before going through this blog article;

The reliability of our examination paper as a measuring instrument is crucial, if we want a good and valid instrument to measure our students’ knowledge and comprehension. However how sure are we, that we are measuring what we want to be measured? Bear in mind, that with this “measurement”, we are actually making some conclusion which may affect someone’s future and we should be responsible enough in exercising due care and diligence. The instrument must have a certain level of difficulty and able to discriminate between the good and poor students. The percentage of correct responses would vary according to each item’s difficulty. The proportion of good or poor students who would respond correctly determine the item’s level of discrimination.

In the earlier articles, we learnt how to calculate the item’s Difficulty Index and Discrimination Index. Then we also show how to determine the reliability of the questions. Based on the results of these calculations, we can determine whether we have been fair to the students or not.

There should be a fair amount of easy, moderate and hard questions. At the same time, there should be no questions with negative or zero discrimination index. If there is any questions with negative or zero discrimination index, we need to check the answer key of that question. A zero or negative index indicates either that topic was not taught at all or has the wrong key.

In terms of KR20 reliability, the value should be 0.7 or more. Whenever our postgraduate students conduct studies, we expect their questionnaire to have a reliability of 0.7 or higher, therefore we as lecturers should adhere to the same standard. But for the last 20 years, the reliability of our examination questions were 0, as reported in the UKM OMR analyses, yet nobody raised any red flags, not even by the MQA and the ISO auditors. I guess in this scenario, “Ignorance (among the auditors) is bliss.”

Only the Average Diff. & Disc. Index are correct.

Reliability Index of Zero.

Therefore any examination, especially those examinations where more than half of the students failed due to the theory paper, should be rigorously examined using the above principles. In summary these are what every module/posting coordinator should do at every examination for the OMR report;

SEM is directly related to the reliability of a test; that is, the larger the SEM, the lower the reliability of the test and the less precision there is in the measures taken and scores obtained. In the earlier example, the SEM was smaller at 1.95 than the standard deviation at 5.64 since it was highly reliable at 0.88. SEM should not be as big as 18.37 for a 30 questions MCQ as in the above OMR report.

Of course the module/posting coordinator should also tally up all the marks from the various components correctly. Always have someone with fresh eyes to check the calculations and formulas within the spreadsheet for the final marks.

Just to illustrate this point, allow me share this tale which happened way back in 2007. However details such as name and places were removed to protect the innocent (and the guilty).

A Tale of Two OMR Marks

Once upon a time in September 2007, there was an examination for a clinical posting. It was a terrible time since 82 (70.1%) of 117 students failed their posting. They failed because of very poor marks for their MCQs. A total of 115 (98.3%) failed their MCQs. Only 2 students passed MCQ, both had 55% marks (23 correct out of 40 questions).

Various excuses were given for the high failure rate, the most often repeated excuse was the allegedly poor attitude of the students towards the posting. Fortunately the leadership of the faculty at that time had the foresight to order a post-mortem.

Since the high failure rate was for the MCQs, attention was given to the OMR report. Not even 5 minutes into the post-mortem meeting, the fault was quickly discovered. Although there were 40 MCQ questions, students were only given marks for the first 24 MCQ questions. The marks for the other 16 questions were ignored by the OMR machine. The MCQs were quickly scanned again at a neutral site and the new OMR marks were carefully inserted in place of the old marks.

Alhamdulillah! Praise Allah! Suddenly almost everyone passed that clinical posting. The fault was human error while programming and scanning the OMR sheets. It was a happy ending, and the students lived happily ever after. Except for the Dean of course, who had to explain to the Senate about the whole thing 😉 but he was okay after that.

Conclusion

It disturbs me that whenever we have more than 50% failure rate for a clinical posting in theory examination, we blamed it on the allegedly poor attitude of the students towards the posting. Yet no evidence was offered to back it up. At the very least,  the affected department should conduct due diligence on the examination and marking process. The current leadership should order a post-mortem since our main business is teaching students, not failing them. When many students failed badly, the teachers should reflect and examine the examination process. No departments should be above scrutiny, all departments should be treated equally, regardless of who are their members.

We are not teaching morons or retards. We are teaching the cream of the cream (crème de la crème) of the Malaysian education system, filtered through the sieve of excellence during the preclinical years. Therefore if we want to blame the students, we must make sure that the blame do not originally lie with us.

“Jangan sampai pisang berbuah dua kali”.

Caveat (warning);
Tale = “a fictitious narrative or story, especially one that is imaginatively recounted.”

<- Part 1 Understanding the UKM OMR Report
<- Part 2 Calculating OMR Indexes
Part 4 -> Matching the right questions to the right students.

Update 9th April 2015;

The OMR software has been rectified for KCKL & PPUKM. It is now reporting the reliability and standard error of measurement correctly.

Reliability & SEM correctly reported.

Reliability & SEM correctly reported.