Student progress decision-making in programmatic assessment: can we extrapolate from clinical decision-making and...

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Assessment and Evaluation
• Decision Science

Background:

• Limited literature exists on aggregating assessment data for student progression decisions.
• Programmatic assessment necessitates robust aggregation of information from diverse sources.
• Progression decision-making shares challenges with clinical and jury decision-making.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore parallels between clinical decision-making and student progression decision-making.
• To identify strategies for robust information aggregation in educational progression decisions.
• To address biases and improve the quality of high-stakes educational decisions.

Main Methods:

• Drawing analogies from clinical decision-making, including sensitivity and specificity.
• Examining group decision-making processes, similar to jury deliberations.
• Analyzing biases inherent in decision-making and group dynamics.

Main Results:

• Clinical decision-making frameworks can inform educational progression decisions.
• Group decision-making, with effective leadership, can improve robustness.
• Biases in decision-making are a significant concern in both fields.
• The 'failure to fail' phenomenon parallels jury leniency.

Conclusions:

• Progression decisions should be made by selected panels with clear policies and documentation.
• Panels require sufficient information and training to optimize synthesis and reduce bias.
• Consensus-based decisions and a high standard of proof (demonstrated student competence) are recommended.