Bowen L Michael, Williams Brett
Department of Community Emergency Health and Paramedic Practice, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2020 Jan 24;11:91-98. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S225818. eCollection 2020.
Professionalism is an essential behavior for paramedic students to demonstrate. In the United States, paramedic accreditation standards require educators to evaluate and document summative affective evaluation on each paramedic student before graduation. The 2009 Emergency Medical Services Education Standards identified the affective behaviors as one of the three learning domains and published a grading tool to help educators recognize professional behaviors. However, little attention was given to the validity or reliability of this tool. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the 5-point Paramedic Affective Domain Tool.
This was a retrospective study with educators that completed evaluations on paramedic students from May 2013 to January 2017. A total of 707 cases met inclusion criteria and 131 unique evaluators from 27 different paramedic programs. A Rasch Partial Credit Model was used to analyze the data.
Almost 97% of the paramedic students received passing scores and 28.1% (n=199) received perfect scores. Only 3.5% (n=25) failed the evaluation. Scores ranged from 11 to 55 (M = 46, SD = 9.02) and α = 0.97. Evidence suggests that the tool is not valid and the clustering of scores suggests minimal information can be gleaned from the results.
Serious consideration should be made in the continued use of this tool and future research should focus on developing a new tool that is both valid and reliable.
专业素养是护理人员学生需要展现的重要行为。在美国，护理人员认证标准要求教育工作者在每个护理人员学生毕业前对其进行总结性情感评估并记录。2009年的紧急医疗服务教育标准将情感行为确定为三个学习领域之一，并发布了一个评分工具来帮助教育工作者识别专业行为。然而，该工具的有效性或可靠性很少受到关注。因此，本研究的目的是评估5分制护理人员情感领域工具的心理测量特性。
这是一项回顾性研究，研究对象是在2013年5月至2017年1月期间完成对护理人员学生评估的教育工作者。共有707个案例符合纳入标准，来自27个不同护理人员项目的131名独立评估者参与其中。采用拉施克部分计分模型对数据进行分析。
几乎97%的护理人员学生获得及格分数，28.1%（n = 199）获得满分。只有3.5%（n = 25）的学生评估不及格。分数范围为11至55（M = 46，SD = 9.02），α = 0.97。有证据表明该工具无效，分数的聚类表明从结果中能收集到的信息极少。
对于该工具的持续使用应进行认真考虑，未来的研究应专注于开发一种既有效又可靠的新工具。
