Search

This study was undertaken to determine the degree of factorial invariance that exists in a battery of predictor variables commonly used in the selection of applicants for dental school. The following variables were used in the analyses performed: 13 subscores from the Dental Aptitude Test Battery, Overall QPA, Required Courses QPA, years of undergraduate education, and a derived composite score. Principal components analysis was performed on the data for three separate classes. With relative consistency, the same three factors appeared in each of the analyses, and were labeled as follows: Science Aptitude, Prior Achievement, Manual Aptitude, and General Ability. (Author)

A battery of perceptual motor skills tests was administered to 107 freshman and 84 senior dental students for the purposes of determining the factor structure of the battery and studying differences between the two groups. The tests used included Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test (MRM), Placing and Turning; O'Connor Finger Dexterity; O'Connor Tweezer Dexterity; Minnesota Spatial Relations; Crawford's Small Parts; and Purdue Pegboard, Both Hands and Assembly. Principal components analysis revealed Manual Dexterity, Finger Dexterity, Tweezer Dexterity and Spatial Relations as interpretable factors for both groups. Comparison of the factor patterns indicated that freshmen and seniors were least comparable on the Spatial Relations factors. It is suggested that as a result of three years of training, perceptual skills become interwined with motor skills and can no longer be expressed as an independent factor. (Author/PR)

This paper is a report of an examination of the relationship between metrics of critical thinking skills and performance in simulated clinical scenarios.Paper and pencil assessments are commonly used to assess critical thinking but may not reflect simulated performance.In 2007, a convenience sample of 36 nursing students participated in measurement of critical thinking skills and simulation-based performance using videotaped vignettes, high-fidelity human simulation, the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory and California Critical Thinking Skills Test. Simulation-based performance was rated as 'meeting' or 'not meeting' overall expectations. Test scores were categorized as strong, average, or weak.Most (75.0%) students did not meet overall performance expectations using videotaped vignettes or high-fidelity human simulation; most difficulty related to problem recognition and reporting findings to the physician. There was no difference between overall performance based on method of assessment (P = 0.277). More students met subcategory expectations for initiating nursing interventions (P ≤ 0.001) using high-fidelity human simulation. The relationship between videotaped vignette performance and critical thinking disposition or skills scores was not statistically significant, except for problem recognition and overall critical thinking skills scores (Cramer's V = 0.444, P = 0.029). There was a statistically significant relationship between overall high-fidelity human simulation performance and overall critical thinking disposition scores (Cramer's V = 0.413, P = 0.047).Students' performance reflected difficulty meeting expectations in simulated clinical scenarios. High-fidelity human simulation performance appeared to approximate scores on metrics of critical thinking best. Further research is needed to determine if simulation-based performance correlates with critical thinking skills in the clinical setting.