Bradley Elizabeth B, Waselewski Eric A, Gusic Maryellen E
Center for Medical Education Research and Scholarly Innovation, Office of Medical Education, University of Virginia School of Medicine, VA Charlottesville, USA.
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan USA.
Med Sci Educ. 2021 Jun 29;31(4):1419-1428. doi: 10.1007/s40670-021-01327-6. eCollection 2021 Aug.
The implementation of programs of assessment based on Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) offers an opportunity for students to obtain unique data to guide their ongoing learning and development. Although authors have explored factors that contribute to trust-based decisions, learners' use of assessors' decisions about the level of supervision they need has not been fully investigated.
In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews of clerkship students who participated in the first year of our EPA program to determine how they interpret and use supervision ratings provided in EPA assessments. Content analysis was performed using concept-driven and open coding.
Nine interviews were completed. Twenty-two codes derived from previous work describing factors involved in trust decisions and 12 novel codes were applied to the interview text. Analyses revealed that students focus on written and verbal feedback from assessors more so than on supervision ratings. Axial coding revealed a temporal organization that categorized how students considered the data from EPA assessments. While factors before, during, and after an assessment affected students' use of information, the relationship between the student and the assessor had impact throughout.
Although students reported varying use of the supervision ratings, their perspectives about how assessors and students interact and/or partner before, during, and after assessments provide insights into the importance of an educational alliance in making a program of assessment meaningful and acceptable to learners.
基于可托付专业活动(EPA)开展评估项目,为学生提供了获取独特数据的机会,以指导他们持续的学习与发展。尽管已有作者探讨了促成基于信任的决策的因素,但学习者如何运用评估者关于其所需监督水平的决策,尚未得到充分研究。
在本研究中,我们对参与我校EPA项目第一年的临床实习学生进行了半结构化访谈,以确定他们如何解读和运用EPA评估中提供的监督评级。采用概念驱动和开放编码进行内容分析。
完成了9次访谈。将先前描述信任决策相关因素的22个编码以及12个新编码应用于访谈文本。分析显示,学生更关注评估者的书面和口头反馈,而非监督评级。轴心编码揭示了一种时间组织方式,对学生如何看待EPA评估数据进行了分类。虽然评估前、评估期间和评估后的因素都会影响学生对信息的使用,但学生与评估者之间的关系在整个过程中都有影响。
尽管学生对监督评级的使用情况各异,但他们对于评估者与学生在评估前、评估期间和评估后如何互动及/或合作的看法,为了解教育联盟在使评估项目对学习者有意义且可接受方面的重要性提供了见解。