Levels of agreement between student and staff assessments of clinical skills in performing cavity preparation in artificial teeth

被引:38
作者
San Diego, J. P. [1 ]
Newton, T. [1 ]
Quinn, B. F. A. [1 ]
Cox, M. J. [1 ]
Woolford, M. J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Kings Coll London, Inst Dent, London SE1 9RT, England
基金
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会; 英国经济与社会研究理事会;
关键词
levels of agreement; self-assessment; cavity preparation in artificial teeth; dental chair simulators; clinical skills; haptics; HIGHER-EDUCATION; SELF-ASSESSMENT;
D O I
10.1111/eje.12059
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
ObjectiveTo determine the level of agreement between staff and students' assessment of clinical skills in performing tasks related to cavity preparation on a traditional dental manikin. MethodsTwo studies were conducted with two successive student cohorts: Study 1-138year 1 BDS students in a 2009/10 cohort and Study 2-135 students in a 2010/11 cohort. Staff members and students rated the students' performance in preparing a cavity on a traditional dental manikin using artificial teeth: hand-held (Study 1) and located in a lower jaw (Study 2). A 5-item criterion-related scoring rubric was developed. The rubric assessed students' abilities to hold the instrument correctly, determine the angle of entry to the tooth, remove the caries, conserve healthy tissues and avoid pulp exposure. ResultsAgreement between the students' self-assessment and the staff's assessment was high for three of the five criteria (i.e. removal of artificial caries on the cavity wall, removal of artificial caries from the cavity floor and avoidance of pulp exposure). Levels of agreement for the remaining two criteria were moderate. A change in task difficulty affected the levels of agreement between staff and students, such that the more difficult the task, the greater the discrepancy in ratings. ConclusionsStudents tend to overrate the quality of their performance when compared with staff ratings. Task difficulty has an impact on levels of agreement.
引用
收藏
页码:58 / 64
页数:7
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
Black P, 1998, PHI DELTA KAPPAN, V80, P139
[2]  
Black P., 1998, Assessment in Education: principles, policy & practice, V5, P7, DOI [10.1080/0969595980050102, DOI 10.1080/0969595980050102]
[3]   QUANTITATIVE STUDIES OF STUDENT SELF-ASSESSMENT IN HIGHER-EDUCATION - A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS [J].
BOUD, D ;
FALCHIKOV, N .
HIGHER EDUCATION, 1989, 18 (05) :529-549
[4]  
Boud D., 1989, Studies in Higher Education, V14, P20
[6]   Assessment of clinical performance during simulated crises using both technical and behavioral ratings [J].
Gaba, DM ;
Howard, SK ;
Flanagan, B ;
Smith, BE ;
Fish, KJ ;
Botney, R .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1998, 89 (01) :8-18
[7]   Faculty and the observation of trainees' clinical skills: Problems and opportunities [J].
Holmboe, ES .
ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2004, 79 (01) :16-22
[8]  
Jokstad A, 1987, SODE, V45, P257
[9]   The interactive examination:: assessing students' self-assessment ability [J].
Mattheos, N ;
Nattestad, A ;
Falk-Nilsson, E ;
Attström, R .
MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2004, 38 (04) :378-389
[10]   E-assessment by design: using multiple-choice tests to good effect [J].
Nicol, David .
JOURNAL OF FURTHER AND HIGHER EDUCATION, 2007, 31 (01) :53-64