Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Performance rating scale for peer and self assessment.

B S Linn, M Arostegui, R Zeppa

    British Journal of Medical Education
    |June 1, 1975
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Natural compounds in anti-leukaemic therapy: a review.

    Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry·2011
    Same author

    On developing careers in trauma and surgical care: report of the ad hoc committee on careers in trauma surgery, Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma.

    The Journal of trauma·1994
    Same author

    Management of lower extremity arterial trauma.

    The Journal of trauma·1994
    Same author

    Urgent lobectomy and pneumonectomy.

    European journal of emergency medicine : official journal of the European Society for Emergency Medicine·1994
    Same author

    Characteristics of trauma centers and trauma surgeons.

    The Journal of trauma·1993
    Same author

    Laparoscopic evaluation of tangential abdominal gunshot wounds.

    Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill. : 1960)·1992
    Same journal

    Textbooks -- a new approach.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    Same journal

    Role of Canadian family medicine teacher in continuing medical education.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    Same journal

    Difficulties in postgraduate training of foreign paediatric residents and interns in child psychiatry.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    Same journal

    Computerization of a patient management problems examination to prevent 'retracing'.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    Same journal

    Multiple choice questions. The debate goes on.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    Same journal

    Internal reliability of MCQ tests: a modification of the KR20 formula to meet a special case.

    British journal of medical education·1975
    See all related articles

    A new performance rating scale for medical students showed good reliability. Peer ratings were more strongly correlated with faculty grades than self-ratings, suggesting their value in assessing student performance.

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Education Research
    • Psychometrics
    • Healthcare Professional Assessment

    Background:

    • Assessing medical student performance is crucial for professional development.
    • Existing evaluation methods, like faculty grading, may not capture all aspects of performance.
    • Developing reliable and valid self and peer assessment tools is important.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To develop and validate a performance rating scale for junior medical students.
    • To compare the validity of self-ratings versus peer ratings against faculty grades.
    • To explore the factor structure of student performance ratings.

    Main Methods:

    • A performance rating scale was administered to junior medical students for self and peer assessment.
    • Factor analysis was used to analyze 928 ratings.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Test-retest reliability was assessed.
  • Correlations between ratings and faculty-assigned grades were calculated.

    • Main Results:

    • Factor analysis revealed two primary factors: knowledge and relationship.
    • The scale demonstrated good test-retest reliability.
    • Peer ratings showed a stronger correlation with faculty grades than self-ratings.
    • Students generally rated themselves lower than their peers rated them.

    Conclusions:

    • The developed performance rating scale is reliable and has potential validity in assessing medical students.
    • Peer assessments appear to be a valuable complement to traditional faculty grading.
    • Further research is needed to evaluate the scale's utility for assessing practicing physicians and its relation to quality of care.