Midclerkship feedback in the surgical clerkship: the “Professionalism, Reporting, Interpreting, Managing, Educating, and Procedural Skills” application utilizing learner self-assessment
The Liaison Committee on Medical Education requires midclerkship formative (low stakes) feedback to students regarding their clinical skills. Student self-assessment is not commonly incorporated into this evaluation. We sought to determine the feasibility of collecting and comparing student self-ass...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American journal of surgery 2017-02, Vol.213 (2), p.212-216 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The Liaison Committee on Medical Education requires midclerkship formative (low stakes) feedback to students regarding their clinical skills. Student self-assessment is not commonly incorporated into this evaluation. We sought to determine the feasibility of collecting and comparing student self-assessment with that of their preceptors using an iPad application. These student self-ratings and preceptor ratings are jointly created and reviewed as part of a face-to-face midclerkship feedback session.
Using our iPad application for Professionalism, Reporting, Interpreting, Managing, Educating, and Procedural Skills (“PRIMES”), students answer 6 questions based on their self-assessment of performance at midclerkship. Each skill is rated on a 3-point scale (beginning, competent, and strong) with specific behavioral anchors. The faculty preceptors then complete the same PRIMES form during the face-to-face meeting. The application displays a comparison of the 2 sets of ratings, facilitating a discussion to determine individualized learning objectives for the second half of the clerkship.
A total of 209 student–preceptor pairs completed PRIMES ratings. On average, student–preceptor ratings were in agreement for 38% of the time. Agreement between students and preceptors was highest for Professionalism (70%) and lowest for Procedural Skills (22%). On average, 60% of student–preceptor ratings did not agree. Students rated themselves lower than preceptors 52% of the time, while only 8% of students rated themselves higher than their preceptors' ratings (this difference is significant at the P value |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0002-9610 1879-1883 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.08.001 |