Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 30, 2026

Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
Published on: April 29, 2014
Why professional judgment is better than objective description in dental faculty evaluations of student performance
David W Chambers1, Eugene E Labarre
1Arthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the Pacific, 2155 Webster Street, San Francisco, CA 94115;. dchambers@pacific.edu.
Abstract:
Practices intended to increase the appearance of objectivity in grading may work at cross purposes with professional judgment. In this study, an analysis of two removable prosthodontics technique projects in one U.S. dental school found that the use of component criteria (checklist) grading was less consistent than overall judgments of the same work and less predictive of dental students' future learning. A factor analysis revealed latent structures in both projects that would make it inappropriate to use a component criteria approach for grading. Common defenses of objectivity-such as scientific foundation, the relationship between reliability and validity, and legal requirements-are questioned in this article, and it is shown how simple adjustments to judgment scores can be made more effective than checklists, faculty calibration, or deselecting faculty members and with better measurement and teaching features.
Related Concept Videos
Nursing Evaluation
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning,...
Surveys
Role of Communication in the Nursing Process III: Evaluation and Documentation
Methods of Documentation III: PIE
The Availability Heuristic

