Literature DB >> 16117749

Medical students' views on peer assessment of professionalism.

Louise Arnold1, Carolyn K Shue, Barbara Kritt, Shiphra Ginsburg, David T Stern.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although peer assessment holds promise for assessing professionalism, reluctance and refusal to participate have been noted among learners and practicing physicians. Understanding the perspectives of potential participants may therefore be important in designing and implementing effective peer assessment.
OBJECTIVE: To identify factors that, according to students themselves, will encourage or discourage participation in peer assessment.
DESIGN: A qualitative study using grounded theory to interpret views shared during 16 focus groups that were conducted by leaders using a semi-structured guide. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-one students in Years 1, 3, and 4 in 2 mid-western public medical schools.
RESULTS: Three themes students say would promote or discourage peer assessment emerged: personal struggles with peer assessment, characteristics of the assessment system itself, and the environment in which the system operates. Students struggle with reporting an unprofessional peer lest they bring harm to the peer, themselves, or their clinic team or work group. Who receives the assessment and gives the peer feedback and whether it is formative or summative and anonymous, signed, or confidential are important system characteristics. Students' views of characteristics promoting peer assessment were not unanimous. Receptivity to peer reports and close positive relationships among students and between students and faculty mark an environment conducive to peer assessment, students say.
CONCLUSIONS: The study lays a foundation for creating acceptable peer assessment systems among students by soliciting their views. Merely introducing an assessment tool will not result in students' willingness to assess each other.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16117749      PMCID: PMC1490208          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0162.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  12 in total

1.  A pilot study of peer review in residency training.

Authors:  P A Thomas; K A Gebo; D B Hellmann
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 2.  Context, conflict, and resolution: a new conceptual framework for evaluating professionalism.

Authors:  S Ginsburg; G Regehr; R Hatala; N McNaughton; A Frohna; B Hodges; L Lingard; D Stern
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Students' perceptions of whistle blowing: implications for self-regulation. A questionnaire and focus group survey.

Authors:  Sarah C Rennie; Joy R Crosby
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 6.251

4.  Performance rating scale for peer and self assessment.

Authors:  B S Linn; M Arostegui; R Zeppa
Journal:  Br J Med Educ       Date:  1975-06

Review 5.  Assessing professional behavior: yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

Authors:  Louise Arnold
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  Peer assessment of competence.

Authors:  John J Norcini
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.251

7.  Unprofessional behavior in medical school is associated with subsequent disciplinary action by a state medical board.

Authors:  Maxine A Papadakis; Carol S Hodgson; Arianne Teherani; Neal D Kohatsu
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.893

8.  Resistance to peer evaluation in an internal medicine residency.

Authors:  G M Van Rosendaal; P A Jennett
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 6.893

9.  Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance.

Authors:  P G Ramsey; M D Wenrich; J D Carline; T S Inui; E B Larson; J P LoGerfo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1993-04-07       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Use of peer evaluation in the assessment of medical students.

Authors:  L Arnold; L Willoughby; V Calkins; L Gammon; G Eberhart
Journal:  J Med Educ       Date:  1981-01
View more
  17 in total

1.  A survey of resident opinions on peer evaluation in a large internal medicine residency program.

Authors:  Denise M Dupras; Randall S Edson
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2011-06

2.  In response to "medical students' views on peer assessment of professionalism".

Authors:  Anne C Nofziger; Stephen J Lurie; Ronald M Epstein
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Peer assessment of professionalism: a five-year experience in medical clerkship.

Authors:  Regina A Kovach; David S Resch; Steven J Verhulst
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Pharmacy students' perceptions of and attitudes towards peer assessment within a drug literature evaluation course.

Authors:  Kimberly Wu; Lindsay Davison; Amy Heck Sheehan
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2012-05-10       Impact factor: 2.047

Review 5.  The Desired Concept Maps and Goal Setting for Assessing Professionalism in Medicine.

Authors:  Salman Y Guraya; Shaista S Guraya; Nehal Anam Mahabbat; Khulood Yahya Fallatah; Bashaer Ahmad Al-Ahmadi; Hadeel Hadi Alalawi
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-05-01

6.  Web-assisted assessment of professional behaviour in problem-based learning: more feedback, yet no qualitative improvement?

Authors:  Walther N K A van Mook; Arno M M Muijtjens; Simone L Gorter; Jan Harm Zwaveling; Lambert W Schuwirth; Cees P M van der Vleuten
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 3.853

7.  Student-derived solutions to address barriers hindering reports of unprofessional behaviour.

Authors:  Jaden R Kohn; Joseph M Armstrong; Rachel A Taylor; Diana L Whitney; Anne C Gill
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 6.251

8.  A Structured Peer Assessment Method with Regular Reinforcement Promotes Longitudinal Self-Perceived Development of Medical Students' Feedback Skills.

Authors:  Bethany Bruno; Jessica Cooperrider; Perry B Dinardo; Alice Tzeng; Rachael Baird; Carol Swetlik; Brittany N Goldstein; Radhika Rastogi; Alicia J Roth; Timothy D Gilligan; Julie M Rish
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2021-03-11

9.  Factors That Determine the Perceived Effectiveness of Peer Feedback in Collaborative Learning: a Mixed Methods Design.

Authors:  Dayane Daou; Ramzi Sabra; Nathalie K Zgheib
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2020-05-19

10.  Relationship between peer assessment during medical school, dean's letter rankings, and ratings by internship directors.

Authors:  Stephen J Lurie; David R Lambert; Anne C Nofziger; Ronald M Epstein; Tana A Grady-Weliky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.