Tricio J, Woolford M, Escudier M
King's College London Dental Institute, London, UK.
Faculty of Dentistry, University of the Andes, Santiago, Chile.
Eur J Dent Educ. 2016 Nov;20(4):241-247. doi: 10.1111/eje.12187. Epub 2016 Feb 22.
Peer assessment and feedback is encouraged to enhance students' learning. The aim of this study was to quantitatively and qualitatively analyse pre-clinical and clinical dental students' written peer feedback provided as part of a continuous, formative and structured peer assessment protocol.
A total of 309 Year-2 and Year-5 dental students were invited to participate in a peer assessment and peer feedback protocol. Consenting volunteer students were trained to observe each other whilst working in the skills laboratory (Year-2) and in the dental clinic (Year-5). Subsequently, they followed a structured protocol of peer assessment and peer feedback using specially designed work-based forms during a complete academic year. The content of their written feedback was coded according to the UK General Dental Council domain, sign (positive or negative), specificity (task specific or general), and grouped into themes.
A total of 108 participants (40 Year-2 and 68 Year-5) completed 1169 peer assessment work-based forms (516 pre-clinical and 653 clinical); 94% contained written feedback. The large majority (82%) of Year-2 feedback represented the clinical domain, 89% were positive, 77% were task specific, and they were grouped into 14 themes. Year-5 feedback was related mostly to Management and Leadership (37%) and Communication (32%), 64% were positive, 75% task specific, and they were clustered into 24 themes.
The content of the feedback showed notable differences between Year-2 and Year-5 students. Senior students focused more on Communication and Management and Leadership skills, whilst juniors were more concerned with clinical skills. Year-5 students provided 13% negative feedback compared to only 2% from Year-2. Regulatory focus theory is discussed to explain these differences. Both groups provided peer feedback on a wide and different range of themes. However, four themes emerged in both groups: efficiency, infection control, time management and working speed.
A structured peer assessment framework can be used to guide pre-clinical and clinical students to provide peer feedback focused on different domains, and on contrasting signs and specificities. It can also present an opportunity to complement tutors' feedback.
鼓励同伴评估和反馈以促进学生学习。本研究的目的是对临床前和临床牙科学生作为持续、形成性和结构化同伴评估方案一部分所提供的书面同伴反馈进行定量和定性分析。
共邀请309名二年级和五年级牙科学生参与同伴评估和同伴反馈方案。同意参与的志愿者学生接受培训,以便在技能实验室(二年级)和牙科诊所(五年级)工作时相互观察。随后,他们在一整个学年中使用专门设计的基于工作的表格遵循结构化的同伴评估和同伴反馈方案。他们书面反馈的内容根据英国牙科总会的领域、正负性(积极或消极)、具体性(特定任务或一般性)进行编码,并分组为主题。
共有108名参与者(40名二年级和68名五年级)完成了1169份基于工作的同伴评估表格(516份临床前和653份临床);94%包含书面反馈。二年级反馈的绝大多数(82%)代表临床领域,89%为积极反馈,77%为特定任务反馈,并分组为14个主题。五年级反馈主要与管理和领导能力(37%)及沟通能力(32%)相关,64%为积极反馈,75%为特定任务反馈,并聚类为24个主题。
反馈内容显示二年级和五年级学生之间存在显著差异。高年级学生更关注沟通以及管理和领导能力,而低年级学生更关注临床技能。五年级学生提供了13%的负面反馈,而二年级仅为2%。讨论了监管焦点理论以解释这些差异。两组都就广泛且不同的主题提供了同伴反馈。然而,两组都出现了四个主题:效率、感染控制、时间管理和工作速度。
结构化的同伴评估框架可用于指导临床前和临床学生提供侧重于不同领域、具有不同正负性和具体性的同伴反馈。它还可以提供一个补充教师反馈的机会。