Andrews Elizabeth, Dickter David N, Stielstra Sorrel, Pape Gary, Aston Sheree J
Elizabeth Andrews, DDS, MS, is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Associate Professor, College of Dental Medicine, Western University of Health Sciences; David N. Dickter, PhD, is Director of Interprofessional Education Research and Strategic Assessment, Office of Academic Affairs, Western University of Health Sciences; Sorrel Stielstra, PhD, is Senior Research Analyst, Office of Academic Affairs, Western University of Health Sciences; Gary Pape, MA, DDS, is Assistant Professor and Coordinator of Faculty Development, College of Dental Medicine, Western University of Health Sciences; and Sheree J. Aston, OD, MA, PhD, is Vice Provost, Office of Academic Affairs, Western University of Health Sciences.
J Dent Educ. 2019 May;83(5):536-545. doi: 10.21815/JDE.019.056. Epub 2019 Feb 25.
Although reviewing dental students' clinical competency assessments is an important aspect of instruction, finding time to give individual feedback to each student poses a challenge for faculty members, and some students may prefer to receive feedback from a peer. The aim of this study was to explore dental students' perceived value of feedback on their performance in a simulated patient care activity from either a faculty member or a peer. Participants were third- and fourth-year dental students who had completed two years of interprofessional instruction and a videotaped objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with standardized patients. Participants in two cohorts were randomly assigned to a faculty or peer feedback group. Cohort one (2015-16) consisted of 66 students: 21 in faculty-led groups, and 45 in peer-led groups. Cohort two (2017) consisted of 60 students: 17 in faculty-led groups, and 43 in peer-led groups. In both types of pairings, the protocol consisted of jointly observing a video recording of student performance in the simulated patient encounter and discussing questions about the student's performance in non-technical competencies such as communication, patient safety, scope of practice, and conflict resolution. For cohort two, prior to the feedback sessions, students in the peer feedback groups received a 60-minute training on providing constructive feedback. All 126 students in the two cohorts completed an evaluation questionnaire after the experience. The results showed that students in both types of feedback sessions perceived value in the feedback and believed it enhanced their skills. However, students rated faculty feedback significantly higher (p<0.05) than peer feedback on nearly all dimensions. Perceived value did not differ by age, gender, class year, or OSCE performance. These results provide support for the value of peer feedback on nontechnical clinical competency assessments, though not as a substitute for faculty feedback.
尽管评估牙科学生的临床能力是教学的一个重要方面,但抽出时间给每个学生提供个人反馈对教师来说是一项挑战,而且一些学生可能更喜欢从同龄人那里获得反馈。本研究的目的是探讨牙科学生对教师或同龄人就其在模拟患者护理活动中的表现提供反馈的感知价值。参与者是三、四年级的牙科学生,他们已经完成了两年的跨专业教学,并参加了与标准化患者进行的录像客观结构化临床考试(OSCE)。两个队列的参与者被随机分配到教师反馈组或同龄人反馈组。队列一(2015 - 16年)由66名学生组成:21名在教师主导的小组中,45名在同龄人主导的小组中。队列二(2017年)由60名学生组成:17名在教师主导的小组中,43名在同龄人主导的小组中。在两种类型的配对中,流程包括共同观看学生在模拟患者接触中的表现视频记录,并讨论关于学生在沟通、患者安全、执业范围和冲突解决等非技术能力方面表现的问题。对于队列二,在反馈会议之前,同龄人反馈组的学生接受了60分钟关于提供建设性反馈的培训。两个队列的所有126名学生在体验后完成了一份评估问卷。结果表明,两种类型反馈会议中的学生都认为反馈有价值,并相信它提高了他们的技能。然而,在几乎所有维度上,学生对教师反馈的评分显著高于同龄人反馈(p<0.05)。感知价值在年龄、性别、年级或OSCE表现方面没有差异。这些结果为同龄人反馈在非技术临床能力评估中的价值提供了支持,尽管不能替代教师反馈。