INTRODUCTION: The Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Instrument (CTEI) was developed to evaluate the quality of the clinical teaching of educators. Its authors reported evidence supporting content and criterion validity and found favourable reliability findings. We tested the validity and reliability of this instrument in a European context and investigated its reliability as an instrument to evaluate the quality of clinical teaching at group level rather than at the level of the individual teacher. METHODS: Students participating in a surgical clerkship were asked to fill in a questionnaire reflecting a student-teacher encounter with a staff member or a resident. We calculated variance components using the urgenova program. For individual score interpretation of the quality of clinical teaching the standard error of estimate was calculated. For group interpretation we calculated the root mean square error. RESULTS: The results did not differ statistically between staff and residents. The average score was 3.42. The largest variance component was associated with rater variance. For individual score interpretation a reliability of > 0.80 was reached with 7 ratings or more. To reach reliable outcomes at group level, 15 educators or more were needed with a single rater per educator. DISCUSSION: The required sample size for appraisal of individual teaching is easily achievable. Reliable findings can also be obtained at group level with a feasible sample size. The results provide additional evidence of the reliability of the CTEI in undergraduate medical education in a European setting. The results also showed that the instrument can be used to measure the quality of teaching at group level.
INTRODUCTION: The Clinical Teaching Effectiveness Instrument (CTEI) was developed to evaluate the quality of the clinical teaching of educators. Its authors reported evidence supporting content and criterion validity and found favourable reliability findings. We tested the validity and reliability of this instrument in a European context and investigated its reliability as an instrument to evaluate the quality of clinical teaching at group level rather than at the level of the individual teacher. METHODS: Students participating in a surgical clerkship were asked to fill in a questionnaire reflecting a student-teacher encounter with a staff member or a resident. We calculated variance components using the urgenova program. For individual score interpretation of the quality of clinical teaching the standard error of estimate was calculated. For group interpretation we calculated the root mean square error. RESULTS: The results did not differ statistically between staff and residents. The average score was 3.42. The largest variance component was associated with rater variance. For individual score interpretation a reliability of > 0.80 was reached with 7 ratings or more. To reach reliable outcomes at group level, 15 educators or more were needed with a single rater per educator. DISCUSSION: The required sample size for appraisal of individual teaching is easily achievable. Reliable findings can also be obtained at group level with a feasible sample size. The results provide additional evidence of the reliability of the CTEI in undergraduate medical education in a European setting. The results also showed that the instrument can be used to measure the quality of teaching at group level.
Authors: S S Lenny Lases; Onyebuchi A Arah; E G J M Robert Pierik; Erik Heineman; M J M H Kiki Lombarts Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Cornelia R M G Fluit; Sanneke Bolhuis; Richard Grol; Roland Laan; Michel Wensing Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-08-12 Impact factor: 5.128