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

Assessing the relationship between peer and facilitator evaluations in case-based learning.

Kristi J Ferguson1, Clarence D Kreiter

  • 1Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. kristi-ferguson@uiowa.edu

Medical Education
|August 19, 2007
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

Investigating the validity of web-enabled mechanistic case diagramming scores to assess students' integration of foundational and clinical sciences.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2019
Same author

Medical Emergency During Flight: A Team-Building Exercise.

MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources·2019
Same author

Nurse anesthetists' evaluations of anesthesiologists' operating room performance are sensitive to anesthesiologists' years of postgraduate practice.

Journal of clinical anesthesia·2018
Same author

Developing an objective assessment of surgical performance from operating room video and surgical imagery.

IISE transactions on healthcare systems engineering·2018
Same author

Time-variable medical education innovation in context.

Advances in medical education and practice·2018
Same author

Generalizability of Competency Assessment Scores Across and Within Clerkships: How Students, Assessors, and Clerkships Matter.

Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges·2018
Same journal

Exploring nurse practitioners' views on the key elements shaping their professional identities within interspecialty practice: A Q methodology study.

Medical education·2026
Same journal

Correspondence: Peer support is not a substitute for institutional reform in mental health disclosure amongst medical students.

Medical education·2026
Same journal

When I say validity.

Medical education·2026
Same journal

Channelling Socrates to re-imagine asynchronous online learning.

Medical education·2026
Same journal

Moving beyond tokenism: A structured and intentional approach to embedding health advocacy in medical education.

Medical education·2026
Same journal

When I say … 'in situ simulation'.

Medical education·2026
See all related articles

Peer evaluations in medical education are valid. This study found that peer and faculty evaluations of Year 1 medical students align, supporting the use of peer assessment in curriculum.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Education
  • Assessment and Evaluation
  • Higher Education Pedagogy

Background:

  • Peer evaluation in academic settings has yielded inconsistent results regarding its validity and integration into curricula.
  • Assessing the effectiveness of peer evaluation is crucial for developing reliable educational tools.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the efficacy and validity of peer evaluations within a Year 1 case-based learning course for medical students.
  • To determine if peer assessments correlate with faculty assessments in a foundational medical curriculum.

Main Methods:

  • Faculty facilitators (n=69) completed 12-item evaluations for each student per case over 3 years.
  • Students (n=415) evaluated peers on written reports and group participation as a course assignment.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Anonymous student and faculty feedback on the peer evaluation process was collected.

    • Main Results:

    • High response rates (95-99%) were observed for student peer evaluations.
    • Correlation coefficients between peer and faculty evaluations ranged from 0.46 to 0.63 (P < 0.001) over 3 years.
    • Generalizability coefficients indicated moderate reliability for peer ratings of written reports (0.52) and group participation (0.60).

    Conclusions:

    • Facilitator and peer ratings assess similar constructs, demonstrating construct validity.
    • Peer evaluation can be implemented validly, even with first-year medical students.
    • Findings support the integration of peer assessment into medical school curricula.