Suppr超能文献

能力的同行评估。

Peer assessment of competence.

作者信息

Norcini John J

机构信息

Foundation for Advancement of International Medical Education and Research, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.

出版信息

Med Educ. 2003 Jun;37(6):539-43. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01536.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This instalment in the series on professional assessment summarises how peers are used in the evaluation process and whether their judgements are reliable and valid.

METHOD

The nature of the judgements peers can make, the aspects of competence they can assess and the factors limiting the quality of the results are described with reference to the literature. The steps in implementation are also provided.

RESULTS

Peers are asked to make judgements about structured tasks or to provide their global impressions of colleagues. Judgements are gathered on whether certain actions were performed, the quality of those actions and/or their suitability for a particular purpose. Peers are used to assess virtually all aspects of professional competence, including technical and non-technical aspects of proficiency. Factors influencing the quality of those assessments are reliability, relationships, stakes and equivalence.

CONCLUSION

Given the broad range of ways peer evaluators can be used and the sizeable number of competencies they can be asked to judge, generalisations are difficult to derive and this form of assessment can be good or bad depending on how it is carried out.

摘要

目的

本系列关于专业评估的这一期总结了同行在评估过程中的使用方式,以及他们的判断是否可靠和有效。

方法

参考文献描述了同行能够做出的判断的性质、他们可以评估的能力方面以及限制结果质量的因素。还提供了实施步骤。

结果

要求同行对结构化任务做出判断或提供对同事的整体印象。收集关于是否执行了某些行动、这些行动的质量和/或它们对特定目的的适用性的判断。同行几乎用于评估专业能力的所有方面,包括熟练程度的技术和非技术方面。影响这些评估质量的因素是可靠性、关系、利害关系和等效性。

结论

鉴于同行评估者的使用方式广泛,以及可以要求他们判断的大量能力,很难得出一般性结论,这种评估形式的好坏取决于其实施方式。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验