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...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
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 |