Search

Intrinsic inequity in assessment refers to sources of harmful discrimination inherent in the design of assessment tools and systems. This study seeks to understand intrinsic inequity in assessment systems by studying assessment policies and associated procedures in residency training, using general pediatrics as a discourse case study. Foucauldian discourse analysis (FDA) was conducted on assessment policy and procedure documents. Two authors independently prepared structured analytic notes using guiding questions. Documents and respective analytic notes were subsequently reviewed independently by all authors. Each author prepared further unstructured analytic notes on the documents' discourse. The authors then compared notes and constructed truth statements (i.e., interpretations of what the discourse establishes as true about the construct under study) and sub-strands (i.e., themes) that were repeated and legitimized across the documents via iterative discussion. Based on analysis, the authors constructed two truth statements. These truth statements, "good assessment is equitable assessment," and "everyone is responsible for inequity," conceptualized inequity in assessment as an isolated or individual-level aberration in an otherwise effective or neutral system. Closer examination of the truth statements and sub-strands in the discourse presented an alternative view, suggesting that inequity may in fact not be an aberration but rather an inherent feature of assessment systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Recent conceptualizations of self-regulated learning acknowledge the importance of co-regulation, i.e., students' interactions with others in their networks to support self-regulation. Using a social network approach, the aim of this study is to explore relationships between characteristics of medical students' co-regulatory networks, perceived learning opportunities, and self-regulated learning. Methods: The authors surveyed 403 undergraduate medical students during their clinical clerkships (response rate 65.5%). Using multiple regression analysis, structural equation modelling techniques, and analysis of variance, the authors explored relationships between co-regulatory network characteristics (network size, network diversity, and interaction frequency), students' perceptions of learning opportunities in the workplace setting, and self-reported self-regulated learning. Results: Across all clerkships, data showed positive relationships between tie strength and self-regulated learning (β = 0.095, p < 0.05) and between network size and tie strength (β = 0.530, p < 0.001), and a negative relationship between network diversity and tie strength (β = −0.474, p < 0.001). Students' perceptions of learning opportunities showed positive relationships with both self-regulated learning (β = 0.295, p < 0.001) and co-regulatory network size (β = 0.134, p < 0.01). Characteristics of clerkship contexts influenced both co-regulatory network characteristics (size and tie strength) and relationships between network characteristics, self-regulated learning, and students' perceptions of learning opportunities. Discussion: The present study reinforces the importance of co-regulatory networks for medical students' self-regulated learning during clinical clerkships. Findings imply that supporting development of strong networks aimed at frequent co-regulatory interactions may enhance medical students' self-regulated learning in challenging clinical learning environments. Social network approaches offer promising ways of further understanding and conceptualising self- and co-regulated learning in clinical workplaces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Portfolio-based assessments require that learners' competence development is adequately reflected in portfolio documentation. This study explored how students select and document performance data in their portfolios and how they perceive these data to be representative for their competence development. Methods: Students uploaded performance data in a competency-based portfolio. During one clerkship period, twelve students also recorded an audio diary in which they reflected on experiences and feedback that they perceived to be indicants of their competence development. Afterwards, these students were interviewed to explore the extent to which the performance documentation in the portfolio corresponded with what they considered illustrative evidence of their development. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results: Portfolios provide an accurate but fragmented picture of student development. Portfolio documentation was influenced by tensions between learning and assessment, student beliefs about the goal of portfolios, student performance evaluation strategies, the learning environment and portfolio structure. Discussion: This study confirms the importance of taking student perceptions into account when implementing a competency-based portfolio. Students would benefit from coaching on how to select meaningful experiences and performance data for documentation in their portfolios. Flexibility in portfolio structure and requirements is essential to ensure optimal fit between students' experienced competence development and portfolio content. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Workplace-Based Assessment (WBA) plays a pivotal role in present-day competency-based medical curricula. Validity in WBA mainly depends on how stakeholders (e.g. clinical supervisors and learners) use the assessments-rather than on the intrinsic qualities of instruments and methods. Current research on assessment in clinical contexts seems to imply that variable behaviours during performance assessment of both assessors and learners may well reflect their respective beliefs and perspectives towards WBA. We therefore performed a Q methodological study to explore perspectives underlying stakeholders' behaviours in WBA in a postgraduate medical training program. Five different perspectives on performance assessment were extracted: Agency, Mutuality, Objectivity, Adaptivity and Accountability. These perspectives reflect both differences and similarities in stakeholder perceptions and preferences regarding the utility of WBA. In comparing and contrasting the various perspectives, we identified two key areas of disagreement, specifically 'the locus of regulation of learning' (i.e., self-regulated versus externally regulated learning) and 'the extent to which assessment should be standardised' (i.e., tailored versus standardised assessment). Differing perspectives may variously affect stakeholders' acceptance, use-and, consequently, the effectiveness-of assessment programmes. Continuous interaction between all stakeholders is essential to monitor, adapt and improve assessment practices and to stimulate the development of a shared mental model. Better understanding of underlying stakeholder perspectives could be an important step in bridging the gap between psychometric and socio-constructivist approaches in WBA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While portfolios are increasingly used to assess competence, the validity of such portfolio-based assessments has hitherto remained unconfirmed. The purpose of the present research is therefore to further our understanding of how assessors form judgments when interpreting the complex data included in a competency-based portfolio. Eighteen assessors appraised one of three competency-based mock portfolios while thinking aloud, before taking part in semi-structured interviews. A thematic analysis of the think-aloud protocols and interviews revealed that assessors reached judgments through a 3-phase cyclical cognitive process of acquiring, organizing, and integrating evidence. Upon conclusion of the first cycle, assessors reviewed the remaining portfolio evidence to look for confirming or disconfirming evidence. Assessors were inclined to stick to their initial judgments even when confronted with seemingly disconfirming evidence. Although assessors reached similar final (pass-fail) judgments of students' professional competence, they differed in their information-processing approaches and the reasoning behind their judgments. Differences sprung from assessors' divergent assessment beliefs, performance theories, and inferences about the student. Assessment beliefs refer to assessors' opinions about what kind of evidence gives the most valuable and trustworthy information about the student's competence, whereas assessors' performance theories concern their conceptualizations of what constitutes professional competence and competent performance. Even when using the same pieces of information, assessors furthermore differed with respect to inferences about the student as a person as well as a (future) professional. Our findings support the notion that assessors' reasoning in judgment and decision-making varies and is guided by their mental models of performance assessment, potentially impacting feedback and the credibility of decisions. Our findings also lend further credence to the assertion that portfolios should be judged by multiple assessors who should, moreover, thoroughly substantiate their judgments. Finally, it is suggested that portfolios be designed in such a way that they facilitate the selection of and navigation through the portfolio evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on the changes on the assessment approaches on the development and competence of medical trainees. Topics discussed include the idea of Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs), the understanding on entrustment decisions in military psychology, organizational psychology, and health care settings, and the concept of psychological safety.

In-training assessment (ITA), defined as multiple assessments of performance in the setting of day-to-day practice, is an invaluable tool in assessment programmes which aim to assess professional competence in a comprehensive and valid way. Research on clinical performance ratings, however, consistently shows weaknesses concerning accuracy, reliability and validity. Attempts to improve the psychometric characteristics of ITA focusing on standardisation and objectivity of measurement thus far result in limited improvement of ITA-practices. The aim of the paper is to demonstrate that the psychometric framework may limit more meaningful educational approaches to performance assessment, because it does not take into account key issues in the mechanics of the assessment process. Based on insights from other disciplines, we propose an approach to ITA that takes a constructivist, social-psychological perspective and integrates elements of theories of cognition, motivation and decision making. A central assumption in the proposed framework is that performance assessment is a judgment and decision making process, in which rating outcomes are influenced by interactions between individuals and the social context in which assessment occurs. The issues raised in the article and the proposed assessment framework bring forward a number of implications for current performance assessment practice. It is argued that focusing on the context of performance assessment may be more effective in improving ITA practices than focusing strictly on raters and rating instruments. Furthermore, the constructivist approach towards assessment has important implications for assessment procedures as well as the evaluation of assessment quality. Finally, it is argued that further research into performance assessment should contribute towards a better understanding of the factors that influence rating outcomes, such as rater motivation, assessment procedures and other contextual variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In health science education clinical clerkships serve the twofold purpose of guiding student learning and assessment of performance. Evidently, both formative and summative assessment procedures are needed in clerkship assessment. In-training evaluation (ITE) has the potential to serve both assessment functions. Implementation of effective ITE, however, has been shown to be problematic, partly because integration of assessment functions may have negative consequences for teaching and learning. This study investigates student perceptions of the impact of an integrated assessment approach, seeking to refine criteria for effective ITE. Method: In the curriculum of Maastricht Midwifery School (MMS), clerkship assessment is based on ITE serving both assessment functions. The ITE model is based on principles of extensive work sampling, and frequent documentation of performance. A focus group technique was used to explore student perceptions on the impact of the ITE approach on student learning and supervisor teaching behaviour, and on the usefulness of information for decision making. Results: Results indicate that the assessment approach is effective in guidance of student learning. Furthermore, students consider the frequent performance documentation essential in clerkship grading. Acceptance and effectivity of ITE requires a learning environment which is safe and respectful. Transparency of assessment processes is the key to success. Suggestions for improvement focus on variation in evaluation formats, improvement of feedback (narrative, complete) and student involvement in assessment. Conclusion: ITE can fulfill both its formative and summative purposes when some crucial conditions are taken into account. Careful training of both supervisors and students in the use of ITE for student learning and performance measurement is essential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite problems concerning generalisability of test results - largely due to limited sampling of the task domain - and questions about test efficiency, the popularity of OSCEs in medical education has motivated the use of similar assessment methods in other health care domains. Purpose of this study was to investigate reproducibility of scores on an OSCE-based test in the relatively narrow domain of midwifery, as compared to the broad medical domain. The influence of global rating scales and adoption of a mastery-oriented test perspective on reproducibility of test scores was investigated in order to explore possibilities to increase test efficiency.A 3-hr, 6-station performance based test was administered to third and fourth year students at Kerkrade Midwifery School (the Netherlands). Students' performance was recorded using a station specific checklist and a global rating scale. For the 3-hr OSCE the generalisability coefficient based on checklist scores is 0.48. Based on global ratings alone, the generalisability coefficient is 0.61. Adjusted dependability indices are 0.85 based on checklist scores and 0.95 for global ratings respectively. Results suggest that even for small domains the problem of case-specificity remains a major impediment to high stakes performance testing. Findings furthermore suggest that use of global rating scales and professional expert judgements in professional competence evaluation is to be preferred to task specific checklists for reasons of reproducibility and efficiency in test development and administration. Adoption of a mastery oriented test perspective may reduce testing time requirements even further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]