Liao Shih-Chieh, Hung Yueh-Nu, Chang Chia-Rung, Ting You-Xin
School of Medicine, China Medical University, Taichung City, Taiwan.
Department of English, National Taichung University of Education, Taichung City, Taiwan.
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2025 May 30;16:953-963. doi: 10.2147/AMEP.S524693. eCollection 2025.
Traditional single-assessment models in service-learning courses do not facilitate comprehensive assessments of learning outcomes. Effective assessments should incorporate perspectives from multiple stakeholders. The present study developed a service-learning course assessment model that incorporates assessments from multiple stakeholders, compared assessments between stakeholder types, and explored the effects of evaluator-student relationship.
The study recruited 126 students from a service-learning course at China Medical University in 2024. Six different groups of stakeholders, namely peers, teaching assistants, service institutions, primary instructors, group instructors, and final report evaluators, evaluated student performance and learning outcomes. Experts ensured that assessment criteria were relevant and comprehensive. Confirmatory factor and principal component analyses were performed to assess the construct validity. The study used descriptive statistics and performed interrater reliability and correlation analyses.
The six groups of evaluators were mostly consistent in their assessments, which clustered into two distinct factors: individual performance (Factor 1) and team/service performance (Factor 2). Factor 1 comprised evaluations from peers, teaching assistants, primary instructors, and group instructors, emphasizing individual students' attendance, participation, and contribution throughout the course. Factor 2 comprised evaluations from service institutions and final report evaluators, focusing on group-level service outcomes and teamwork effectiveness. These two factors explained a cumulative variance of 77.94%. The study identified 15 correlation coefficients: 8 were significantly positive-indicating agreement within or across factors; 2 were significantly negative-highlighting potential divergences in perspective; and 5 were nonsignificant. The relationship between evaluator and student significantly affected assessment outcomes. For instance, peer assessments were the most variable due to subjective influences such as interpersonal dynamics and collaboration history, whereas group instructor assessments showed the least variability, possibly due to a more outcome-focused evaluation approach.
Assessments by different types of evaluators are relatively consistent, and the evaluator-student relationship influences assessment outcomes.
服务学习课程中的传统单一评估模式不利于对学习成果进行全面评估。有效的评估应纳入多个利益相关者的观点。本研究开发了一种服务学习课程评估模型,该模型纳入了多个利益相关者的评估,比较了不同利益相关者类型之间的评估,并探讨了评估者与学生关系的影响。
该研究于2024年从中国医科大学的一门服务学习课程中招募了126名学生。六组不同的利益相关者,即同伴、助教、服务机构、主授课教师、小组指导教师和期末报告评估者,对学生的表现和学习成果进行了评估。专家确保评估标准相关且全面。进行了验证性因素分析和主成分分析以评估结构效度。该研究使用了描述性统计,并进行了评分者间信度和相关性分析。
六组评估者的评估大多一致,这些评估聚为两个不同的因素:个人表现(因素1)和团队/服务表现(因素2)。因素1包括同伴、助教、主授课教师和小组指导教师的评估,强调单个学生在整个课程中的出勤、参与和贡献。因素2包括服务机构和期末报告评估者的评估,侧重于小组层面的服务成果和团队合作有效性。这两个因素解释的累积方差为77.94%。该研究确定了15个相关系数:8个为显著正相关——表明因素内或因素间的一致性;2个为显著负相关——突出了潜在的观点差异;5个不显著。评估者与学生之间的关系显著影响评估结果。例如,同伴评估由于人际动态和合作历史等主观影响而变化最大,而小组指导教师的评估变化最小,这可能是由于更注重结果的评估方法。
不同类型评估者的评估相对一致,且评估者与学生的关系会影响评估结果。