Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study

Introduction Peer assessment is increasingly used in health education. The aims of this study were to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, educational impact and student's perceptions of undergraduate pre‐clinical and clinical dental students' structured and prospective Peer assessment and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of dental education 2015-08, Vol.19 (3), p.140-148
Hauptverfasser: Tricio, J., Woolford, M., Thomas, M., Lewis-Greene, H., Georghiou, L., Andiappan, M., Escudier, M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 148
container_issue 3
container_start_page 140
container_title European journal of dental education
container_volume 19
creator Tricio, J.
Woolford, M.
Thomas, M.
Lewis-Greene, H.
Georghiou, L.
Andiappan, M.
Escudier, M.
description Introduction Peer assessment is increasingly used in health education. The aims of this study were to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, educational impact and student's perceptions of undergraduate pre‐clinical and clinical dental students' structured and prospective Peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Materials and methods Two Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms were modified for use in pre‐clinical and clinical peer assessment. Ten year two dental students working in a phantom‐heads skills laboratory and 16‐year five dental students attending a comprehensive care clinic piloted both peer DOPS forms. After training, pairs of students observed, assessed and provided immediate feedback to each other using their respective peer DOPS forms as frameworks. At the end of the 3‐month study period, students anonymously provided their perceptions of the protocol. Results Year 2 and year 5 students completed 57 and 104 peer DOPS forms, respectively. The generalizability coefficient was 0.62 for year 2 (six encounters) and 0.67 for year 5 (seven encounters). Both groups were able to differentiate amongst peer‐assessed domains and so detect improvement in peers' performance over time. Peer DOPS scores of both groups showed a positive correlation with their mean end‐of‐year examination marks (r ≥ 0.505, P ≥ 0.051) although this was not statistically significant. There was no difference (P ≥ 0.094) between the end‐of‐year examination marks of the participating students and the rest of their respective classes. The vast majority of both groups expressed positive perceptions of the piloted protocol. Discussion There are no data in the literature on the prospective use of peer assessment in the dental undergraduate setting. In the current study, both pre‐clinical and clinical students demonstrated the ability to identify those domains where peers performed better, as well as those which needed improvement. Despite no observable educational impact, most students reported positive perceptions of the peer DOPS protocol. Conclusions The results of this pilot study support the need for and the potential benefit of a larger‐ and longer‐term follow‐up study utilising the protocol.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/eje.12114
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1697756747</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3747260441</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4614-6b12355e8360fb3e5bd9a4ea0da860d9ef464f97009d0f6343b0785fb53466fc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9PwkAQxTdGI4ge_AKmiQf1UJll_7V6MoggIXrRkHjZbNtpUixQu63Kt3elwMHEucxk8puXN4-QUwrX1FUXZ3hNe5TyPdKmEsAHocJ9N7NQ-iIIWIscWTsDgEAwOCStnqAy4BC2ye09LiqTe7aqEzfZC69ALD1jLVo7d5sbz3hFubQFxlX2iV6R5ctqja-OyUFqcosnm94hrw-Dl_7InzwPH_t3Ez_mknJfRrTHhMCASUgjhiJKQsPRQGICCUmIKZc8DRVAmEAqGWcRqECkkWBcyjRmHXLZ6DofHzXaSs8zG2OemwUua6upDJUSUnHl0PM_6GxZlwvnbk1RxZjqOeqqoWL3mC0x1UWZzU250hT0b6LaJarXiTr2bKNYR3NMduQ2Qgd0G-Ary3H1v5IejAdbSb-5yGyF37sLU75rqZgSevo01EJO30ZCjvWU_QDYJIyu</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1697173372</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Tricio, J. ; Woolford, M. ; Thomas, M. ; Lewis-Greene, H. ; Georghiou, L. ; Andiappan, M. ; Escudier, M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Tricio, J. ; Woolford, M. ; Thomas, M. ; Lewis-Greene, H. ; Georghiou, L. ; Andiappan, M. ; Escudier, M.</creatorcontrib><description>Introduction Peer assessment is increasingly used in health education. The aims of this study were to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, educational impact and student's perceptions of undergraduate pre‐clinical and clinical dental students' structured and prospective Peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Materials and methods Two Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms were modified for use in pre‐clinical and clinical peer assessment. Ten year two dental students working in a phantom‐heads skills laboratory and 16‐year five dental students attending a comprehensive care clinic piloted both peer DOPS forms. After training, pairs of students observed, assessed and provided immediate feedback to each other using their respective peer DOPS forms as frameworks. At the end of the 3‐month study period, students anonymously provided their perceptions of the protocol. Results Year 2 and year 5 students completed 57 and 104 peer DOPS forms, respectively. The generalizability coefficient was 0.62 for year 2 (six encounters) and 0.67 for year 5 (seven encounters). Both groups were able to differentiate amongst peer‐assessed domains and so detect improvement in peers' performance over time. Peer DOPS scores of both groups showed a positive correlation with their mean end‐of‐year examination marks (r ≥ 0.505, P ≥ 0.051) although this was not statistically significant. There was no difference (P ≥ 0.094) between the end‐of‐year examination marks of the participating students and the rest of their respective classes. The vast majority of both groups expressed positive perceptions of the piloted protocol. Discussion There are no data in the literature on the prospective use of peer assessment in the dental undergraduate setting. In the current study, both pre‐clinical and clinical students demonstrated the ability to identify those domains where peers performed better, as well as those which needed improvement. Despite no observable educational impact, most students reported positive perceptions of the peer DOPS protocol. Conclusions The results of this pilot study support the need for and the potential benefit of a larger‐ and longer‐term follow‐up study utilising the protocol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1396-5883</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1600-0579</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/eje.12114</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25168409</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Clinical Competence ; Dental schools ; Dentistry ; Direct Observation of Procedural Skills ; Education, Dental ; Educational evaluation ; Educational Measurement - methods ; Feedback ; Female ; Humans ; London ; Male ; peer assessment ; peer feedback ; Peer Review ; Peers ; Pilot Projects ; Prospective Studies ; Students ; Students, Dental</subject><ispartof>European journal of dental education, 2015-08, Vol.19 (3), p.140-148</ispartof><rights>2014 John Wiley &amp; Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</rights><rights>2014 John Wiley &amp; Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2015 John Wiley&amp;Sons A/S</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4614-6b12355e8360fb3e5bd9a4ea0da860d9ef464f97009d0f6343b0785fb53466fc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4614-6b12355e8360fb3e5bd9a4ea0da860d9ef464f97009d0f6343b0785fb53466fc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Feje.12114$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Feje.12114$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25168409$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tricio, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woolford, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis-Greene, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Georghiou, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andiappan, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escudier, M.</creatorcontrib><title>Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study</title><title>European journal of dental education</title><addtitle>Eur J Dent Educ</addtitle><description>Introduction Peer assessment is increasingly used in health education. The aims of this study were to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, educational impact and student's perceptions of undergraduate pre‐clinical and clinical dental students' structured and prospective Peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Materials and methods Two Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms were modified for use in pre‐clinical and clinical peer assessment. Ten year two dental students working in a phantom‐heads skills laboratory and 16‐year five dental students attending a comprehensive care clinic piloted both peer DOPS forms. After training, pairs of students observed, assessed and provided immediate feedback to each other using their respective peer DOPS forms as frameworks. At the end of the 3‐month study period, students anonymously provided their perceptions of the protocol. Results Year 2 and year 5 students completed 57 and 104 peer DOPS forms, respectively. The generalizability coefficient was 0.62 for year 2 (six encounters) and 0.67 for year 5 (seven encounters). Both groups were able to differentiate amongst peer‐assessed domains and so detect improvement in peers' performance over time. Peer DOPS scores of both groups showed a positive correlation with their mean end‐of‐year examination marks (r ≥ 0.505, P ≥ 0.051) although this was not statistically significant. There was no difference (P ≥ 0.094) between the end‐of‐year examination marks of the participating students and the rest of their respective classes. The vast majority of both groups expressed positive perceptions of the piloted protocol. Discussion There are no data in the literature on the prospective use of peer assessment in the dental undergraduate setting. In the current study, both pre‐clinical and clinical students demonstrated the ability to identify those domains where peers performed better, as well as those which needed improvement. Despite no observable educational impact, most students reported positive perceptions of the peer DOPS protocol. Conclusions The results of this pilot study support the need for and the potential benefit of a larger‐ and longer‐term follow‐up study utilising the protocol.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Clinical Competence</subject><subject>Dental schools</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Direct Observation of Procedural Skills</subject><subject>Education, Dental</subject><subject>Educational evaluation</subject><subject>Educational Measurement - methods</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>London</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>peer assessment</subject><subject>peer feedback</subject><subject>Peer Review</subject><subject>Peers</subject><subject>Pilot Projects</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Students, Dental</subject><issn>1396-5883</issn><issn>1600-0579</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE9PwkAQxTdGI4ge_AKmiQf1UJll_7V6MoggIXrRkHjZbNtpUixQu63Kt3elwMHEucxk8puXN4-QUwrX1FUXZ3hNe5TyPdKmEsAHocJ9N7NQ-iIIWIscWTsDgEAwOCStnqAy4BC2ye09LiqTe7aqEzfZC69ALD1jLVo7d5sbz3hFubQFxlX2iV6R5ctqja-OyUFqcosnm94hrw-Dl_7InzwPH_t3Ez_mknJfRrTHhMCASUgjhiJKQsPRQGICCUmIKZc8DRVAmEAqGWcRqECkkWBcyjRmHXLZ6DofHzXaSs8zG2OemwUua6upDJUSUnHl0PM_6GxZlwvnbk1RxZjqOeqqoWL3mC0x1UWZzU250hT0b6LaJarXiTr2bKNYR3NMduQ2Qgd0G-Ary3H1v5IejAdbSb-5yGyF37sLU75rqZgSevo01EJO30ZCjvWU_QDYJIyu</recordid><startdate>201508</startdate><enddate>201508</enddate><creator>Tricio, J.</creator><creator>Woolford, M.</creator><creator>Thomas, M.</creator><creator>Lewis-Greene, H.</creator><creator>Georghiou, L.</creator><creator>Andiappan, M.</creator><creator>Escudier, M.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201508</creationdate><title>Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study</title><author>Tricio, J. ; Woolford, M. ; Thomas, M. ; Lewis-Greene, H. ; Georghiou, L. ; Andiappan, M. ; Escudier, M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4614-6b12355e8360fb3e5bd9a4ea0da860d9ef464f97009d0f6343b0785fb53466fc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Clinical Competence</topic><topic>Dental schools</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Direct Observation of Procedural Skills</topic><topic>Education, Dental</topic><topic>Educational evaluation</topic><topic>Educational Measurement - methods</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>London</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>peer assessment</topic><topic>peer feedback</topic><topic>Peer Review</topic><topic>Peers</topic><topic>Pilot Projects</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Students, Dental</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tricio, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woolford, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thomas, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewis-Greene, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Georghiou, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andiappan, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Escudier, M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of dental education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tricio, J.</au><au>Woolford, M.</au><au>Thomas, M.</au><au>Lewis-Greene, H.</au><au>Georghiou, L.</au><au>Andiappan, M.</au><au>Escudier, M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study</atitle><jtitle>European journal of dental education</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Dent Educ</addtitle><date>2015-08</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>140</spage><epage>148</epage><pages>140-148</pages><issn>1396-5883</issn><eissn>1600-0579</eissn><abstract>Introduction Peer assessment is increasingly used in health education. The aims of this study were to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, educational impact and student's perceptions of undergraduate pre‐clinical and clinical dental students' structured and prospective Peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Materials and methods Two Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS) forms were modified for use in pre‐clinical and clinical peer assessment. Ten year two dental students working in a phantom‐heads skills laboratory and 16‐year five dental students attending a comprehensive care clinic piloted both peer DOPS forms. After training, pairs of students observed, assessed and provided immediate feedback to each other using their respective peer DOPS forms as frameworks. At the end of the 3‐month study period, students anonymously provided their perceptions of the protocol. Results Year 2 and year 5 students completed 57 and 104 peer DOPS forms, respectively. The generalizability coefficient was 0.62 for year 2 (six encounters) and 0.67 for year 5 (seven encounters). Both groups were able to differentiate amongst peer‐assessed domains and so detect improvement in peers' performance over time. Peer DOPS scores of both groups showed a positive correlation with their mean end‐of‐year examination marks (r ≥ 0.505, P ≥ 0.051) although this was not statistically significant. There was no difference (P ≥ 0.094) between the end‐of‐year examination marks of the participating students and the rest of their respective classes. The vast majority of both groups expressed positive perceptions of the piloted protocol. Discussion There are no data in the literature on the prospective use of peer assessment in the dental undergraduate setting. In the current study, both pre‐clinical and clinical students demonstrated the ability to identify those domains where peers performed better, as well as those which needed improvement. Despite no observable educational impact, most students reported positive perceptions of the peer DOPS protocol. Conclusions The results of this pilot study support the need for and the potential benefit of a larger‐ and longer‐term follow‐up study utilising the protocol.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>25168409</pmid><doi>10.1111/eje.12114</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1396-5883
ispartof European journal of dental education, 2015-08, Vol.19 (3), p.140-148
issn 1396-5883
1600-0579
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1697756747
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Clinical Competence
Dental schools
Dentistry
Direct Observation of Procedural Skills
Education, Dental
Educational evaluation
Educational Measurement - methods
Feedback
Female
Humans
London
Male
peer assessment
peer feedback
Peer Review
Peers
Pilot Projects
Prospective Studies
Students
Students, Dental
title Dental students' peer assessment: a prospective pilot study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T13%3A17%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dental%20students'%20peer%20assessment:%20a%20prospective%20pilot%20study&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20dental%20education&rft.au=Tricio,%20J.&rft.date=2015-08&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=140&rft.epage=148&rft.pages=140-148&rft.issn=1396-5883&rft.eissn=1600-0579&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/eje.12114&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3747260441%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1697173372&rft_id=info:pmid/25168409&rfr_iscdi=true