Literature DB >> 16832709

Distorted perceptions of competence and incompetence are more than regression effects.

M Albanese1, S Dottl, G Mejicano, L Zakowski, C Seibert, S Van Eyck, C Prucha.   

Abstract

Students inaccurately assess their own skills, especially high- or low-performers on exams. This study assessed whether regression effects account for this observation. After completing the Infection and Immunity course final exam (IIF), second year medical students (N = 143) estimated their performance on the IIF in terms of percent correct and percentile rank. Second year grade point averages (M2GPAs) were combined with the IIF results to form five subgroups: 1 = true-low (lowest third on both IIF and M2GPA, 2 = false-low (lowest third on IIF only), 3 = middle (neither lowest nor highest third on IIF), 4 = false-high (highest third on IIF only), 5 = true-high (highest third on IIF and M2GPA). The false-low and false-high groups were considered more susceptible to regression effects due to likely group misclassification. Differences between self-assessment and actual performance within each group and between the five groups were used to estimate what portion of observed differences is due to general tendencies versus regression effects. Results found that students accurately assessed their percent correct, but inaccurately assessed their percentile rank. No statistically significant differences existed between the true and false-low subgroups nor the true- and false-high subgroups. Percentages of mean differences suggest that while regression effects resulted in 50-75% over/under-estimates of scores by students who were misclassified, when they were merged with the true-low/high groups, they do not account for more than 14% of low performer over-estimates of their performance and high performer under-estimates of their performance. Accurate percent correct assessments and distorted percentile rank assessments are challenges in using instructional methods dependent on student self-assessments of their learning needs. Identifying and helping students with distorted perceptions of their test performances may be a key issue in such instructional approaches.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16832709     DOI: 10.1007/s10459-005-2400-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract        ISSN: 1382-4996            Impact factor:   3.853


  4 in total

Review 1.  Self versus external assessment for technical tasks in surgery: a narrative review.

Authors:  Boris Zevin
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2012-12

2.  Preparedness for caring of cancer survivors: a multi-institutional study of medical students and oncology fellows.

Authors:  Sebastian Uijtdehaage; Karen E Hauer; Margaret Stuber; Vay Liang Go; Shobita Rajagopalan; Luann Wilkerson
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 2.037

3.  Reliability of a seminar grading rubric in a grand rounds course.

Authors:  Eric J Maclaughlin; David S Fike; Carlos A Alvarez; Charles F Seifert; Amie T Blaszczyk
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2010-09-09

4.  Assessment of course-based undergraduate research experiences: a meeting report.

Authors:  Lisa Corwin Auchincloss; Sandra L Laursen; Janet L Branchaw; Kevin Eagan; Mark Graham; David I Hanauer; Gwendolyn Lawrie; Colleen M McLinn; Nancy Pelaez; Susan Rowland; Marcy Towns; Nancy M Trautmann; Pratibha Varma-Nelson; Timothy J Weston; Erin L Dolan
Journal:  CBE Life Sci Educ       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.325

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.