Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia

Purpose Peer assessment provides a framework for developing expected skills and receiving feedback appropriate to the learner’s level. Near-peer (NP) assessment may elevate expectations and motivate learning. Feedback from peers and NPs may be a sustainable way to enhance student assessment feedback...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kylie Fitzgerald, Brett Vaughan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Korea Health Insurance Licensing Examination Institute 2018-09-01
Series:Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.jeehp.org/upload/jeehp-15-22.pdf
id doaj-7ec0fcf13b4541a182e0934ddff6eb88
record_format Article
spelling doaj-7ec0fcf13b4541a182e0934ddff6eb882021-01-19T23:41:49ZengKorea Health Insurance Licensing Examination InstituteJournal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions1975-59372018-09-011510.3352/jeehp.2018.15.22291Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in AustraliaKylie Fitzgerald0Brett Vaughan1College of Health and Biomedicine, Victoria University, Melbourne, AustraliaDepartment of Medical Education, Melbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, AustraliaPurpose Peer assessment provides a framework for developing expected skills and receiving feedback appropriate to the learner’s level. Near-peer (NP) assessment may elevate expectations and motivate learning. Feedback from peers and NPs may be a sustainable way to enhance student assessment feedback. This study analysed relationships among self, peer, NP, and faculty marking of an assessment and students’ attitudes towards marking by those various groups. Methods A cross-sectional study design was used. Year 2 osteopathy students (n= 86) were invited to perform self and peer assessments of a clinical history-taking and communication skills assessment. NPs and faculty also marked the assessment. Year 2 students also completed a questionnaire on their attitudes to peer/NP marking. Descriptive statistics and the Spearman rho coefficient were used to evaluate relationships across marker groups. Results Year 2 students (n= 9), NPs (n= 3), and faculty (n= 5) were recruited. Correlations between self and peer (r= 0.38) and self and faculty (r= 0.43) marks were moderate. A weak correlation was observed between self and NP marks (r= 0.25). Perceptions of peer and NP marking varied, with over half of the cohort suggesting that peer or NP assessments should not contribute to their grade. Conclusion Framing peer and NP assessment as another feedback source may offer a sustainable method for enhancing feedback without overloading faculty resources. Multiple sources of feedback may assist in developing assessment literacy and calibrating students’ self-assessment capability. The small number of students recruited suggests some acceptability of peer and NP assessment; however, further work is required to increase its acceptability.http://www.jeehp.org/upload/jeehp-15-22.pdfpeer reviewself-assessmentfeedbackeducational measurementosteopathic medicine
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kylie Fitzgerald
Brett Vaughan
spellingShingle Kylie Fitzgerald
Brett Vaughan
Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
peer review
self-assessment
feedback
educational measurement
osteopathic medicine
author_facet Kylie Fitzgerald
Brett Vaughan
author_sort Kylie Fitzgerald
title Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
title_short Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
title_full Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
title_fullStr Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
title_full_unstemmed Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in Australia
title_sort learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, nearpeer, and faculty assessments of a clinical history-taking task in australia
publisher Korea Health Insurance Licensing Examination Institute
series Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
issn 1975-5937
publishDate 2018-09-01
description Purpose Peer assessment provides a framework for developing expected skills and receiving feedback appropriate to the learner’s level. Near-peer (NP) assessment may elevate expectations and motivate learning. Feedback from peers and NPs may be a sustainable way to enhance student assessment feedback. This study analysed relationships among self, peer, NP, and faculty marking of an assessment and students’ attitudes towards marking by those various groups. Methods A cross-sectional study design was used. Year 2 osteopathy students (n= 86) were invited to perform self and peer assessments of a clinical history-taking and communication skills assessment. NPs and faculty also marked the assessment. Year 2 students also completed a questionnaire on their attitudes to peer/NP marking. Descriptive statistics and the Spearman rho coefficient were used to evaluate relationships across marker groups. Results Year 2 students (n= 9), NPs (n= 3), and faculty (n= 5) were recruited. Correlations between self and peer (r= 0.38) and self and faculty (r= 0.43) marks were moderate. A weak correlation was observed between self and NP marks (r= 0.25). Perceptions of peer and NP marking varied, with over half of the cohort suggesting that peer or NP assessments should not contribute to their grade. Conclusion Framing peer and NP assessment as another feedback source may offer a sustainable method for enhancing feedback without overloading faculty resources. Multiple sources of feedback may assist in developing assessment literacy and calibrating students’ self-assessment capability. The small number of students recruited suggests some acceptability of peer and NP assessment; however, further work is required to increase its acceptability.
topic peer review
self-assessment
feedback
educational measurement
osteopathic medicine
url http://www.jeehp.org/upload/jeehp-15-22.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT kyliefitzgerald learningthroughmultiplelensesanalysisofselfpeernearpeerandfacultyassessmentsofaclinicalhistorytakingtaskinaustralia
AT brettvaughan learningthroughmultiplelensesanalysisofselfpeernearpeerandfacultyassessmentsofaclinicalhistorytakingtaskinaustralia
_version_ 1724331729954537472