Open book exams: A potential solution to the “full curriculum”?

Abstract

In this Personal View article, as curriculum designers, we consider whether there is a place for open book exams in Medical School curricula. Specifically, at a time when medical teachers complain about the difficulties of delivering a full curriculum, we propose that open book assessment approaches may help to free up the curriculum as learners become less reliant on memorizing facts. Moreover deeper learning of higher level outcomes can be achieved and more authentic assessment approaches undertaken. We also look at the recent literature and consider reasons, both for and against open book exams, at theoretical and practical levels. Though there are potential challenges with delivering an open book exam, we conclude that the benefits appear to outweigh these difficulties. As part of a balanced assessment strategy it may be necessary and timely to adopt open book exams.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article..

Notes on contributors

Andrew Teodorczuk, FRCPsych, MD, MBChB, is an Associate Professor in Medical Education and Year 3 & 4 Lead at the School of Medicine, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia. He also leads on interprofessional education for the MD program. By clinical background he is a Deliriumologist and Psychiatrist.

James Fraser, MBBS, MSpMed, MHE, is a Medical Educator and Emergency Medicine Clinician.

Gary D. Rogers, MBBS, PhD, is a Professor of Medical Education and Deputy Head (Learning & Teaching) of the School of Medicine at Griffith University, in addition to a role as Program Lead for Interprofessional and Simulation-Based Learning in the Griffith Health Institute for the Development of Education and Scholarship (Health IDEAS).