BACKGROUND: Measurement of the quality of team processes in medical education, particularly in classroom-based teaching settings, has been limited by a lack of measurement instruments. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and test an instrument to measure the quality of team interactions. METHOD: The authors created 30 items and reduced these to 18 items using factor analysis. They distributed the scale to 309 second-year medical students (RR = 95%) in a course that used teams and measured internal consistency, validity, and differences in scores between teams. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for the scale was 0.97. Team ratings were variable, with a mean score of 95.7 (SD 8.5) out of 108. Team Performance Scale (TPS) scores correlated inversely with the spread of peer evaluation scores (r = -0.38, P = .003). Differences between teams were statistically significant (P < .001, eta = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: The TPS was short, had evidence of reliability and validity, and exhibited the capacity to distinguish between teams. This instrument can provide a measure of the quality of team interactions. More work is needed to provide further evidence of validity and generalizability.
BACKGROUND: Measurement of the quality of team processes in medical education, particularly in classroom-based teaching settings, has been limited by a lack of measurement instruments. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and test an instrument to measure the quality of team interactions. METHOD: The authors created 30 items and reduced these to 18 items using factor analysis. They distributed the scale to 309 second-year medical students (RR = 95%) in a course that used teams and measured internal consistency, validity, and differences in scores between teams. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for the scale was 0.97. Team ratings were variable, with a mean score of 95.7 (SD 8.5) out of 108. Team Performance Scale (TPS) scores correlated inversely with the spread of peer evaluation scores (r = -0.38, P = .003). Differences between teams were statistically significant (P < .001, eta = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: The TPS was short, had evidence of reliability and validity, and exhibited the capacity to distinguish between teams. This instrument can provide a measure of the quality of team interactions. More work is needed to provide further evidence of validity and generalizability.
Authors: Sarah Shrader; Michelle Z Farland; Jennifer Danielson; Brigitte Sicat; Elena M Umland Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Annette Burgess; Jane Bleasel; Inam Haq; Chris Roberts; Roger Garsia; Tomas Robertson; Craig Mellis Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 2.463