MaReS (Magdeburg Reflective Writing Scoring Rubric for Feedback) - development of a feedback method for reflective writing in health professions education: A pilot study in veterinary medicine.

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
GMS Journal for Medical Education Pub Date : 2025-04-15 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3205/zma001752
Sabine Ramspott, Ulrike Sonntag, Anja Härtl, Stefan Rüttermann, Doris Roller, Marianne Giesler, Linn Hempel
{"title":"MaReS (Magdeburg Reflective Writing Scoring Rubric for Feedback) - development of a feedback method for reflective writing in health professions education: A pilot study in veterinary medicine.","authors":"Sabine Ramspott, Ulrike Sonntag, Anja Härtl, Stefan Rüttermann, Doris Roller, Marianne Giesler, Linn Hempel","doi":"10.3205/zma001752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The aim of the study was to develop a scoring rubric that provides valuable feedback to students and to gather evidence for its construct validity.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>The Magdeburg Reflective Writing Feedback and Scoring Rubric (MaReS) was developed in an iterative process following a symposium on reflection by a committee of the \"DACH Association for Medical Education (GMA)\" in June 2016. 25 essays written by 13 veterinary students were assessed by three independent raters with MaReS and by two raters with the REFLECT rubric in two runs (13 and twelve essays). Validity evidence was gathered referring to the following of Messick's components of construct validity: content (rubric development), response process (rater manual, rater training, rating time, students' evaluation), internal structure (inter-rater reliability, IRR), and relationship to other variables (comparison of the rating with the REFLECT rubric and a global rating scale).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analytic rubric comprises twelve items that are rated on three-point rating scales. The authors developed an assignment with guiding questions for students and a rater manual. Results for free marginal kappa of the items of MaReS ranged from -0.08 to 0.77 for the first set of reflective essays and from 0.13 to 0.75 for the second set. Correlations between MaReS and the REFLECT rubric were positive (first run: r=0.92 (p<0.001); second run: r=0.29 (p=0.37)).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>MaReS might be a useful tool to guide students' reflective writing and provide structured feedback in health professions education. Using more essays for a rater training and more training cycles are likely to result in higher IRRs.</p>","PeriodicalId":45850,"journal":{"name":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","volume":"42 2","pages":"Doc28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12131509/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS Journal for Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was to develop a scoring rubric that provides valuable feedback to students and to gather evidence for its construct validity.

Methodology: The Magdeburg Reflective Writing Feedback and Scoring Rubric (MaReS) was developed in an iterative process following a symposium on reflection by a committee of the "DACH Association for Medical Education (GMA)" in June 2016. 25 essays written by 13 veterinary students were assessed by three independent raters with MaReS and by two raters with the REFLECT rubric in two runs (13 and twelve essays). Validity evidence was gathered referring to the following of Messick's components of construct validity: content (rubric development), response process (rater manual, rater training, rating time, students' evaluation), internal structure (inter-rater reliability, IRR), and relationship to other variables (comparison of the rating with the REFLECT rubric and a global rating scale).

Results: The analytic rubric comprises twelve items that are rated on three-point rating scales. The authors developed an assignment with guiding questions for students and a rater manual. Results for free marginal kappa of the items of MaReS ranged from -0.08 to 0.77 for the first set of reflective essays and from 0.13 to 0.75 for the second set. Correlations between MaReS and the REFLECT rubric were positive (first run: r=0.92 (p<0.001); second run: r=0.29 (p=0.37)).

Conclusion: MaReS might be a useful tool to guide students' reflective writing and provide structured feedback in health professions education. Using more essays for a rater training and more training cycles are likely to result in higher IRRs.

MaReS(马格德堡反思性写作反馈评分标准)-卫生专业教育中反思性写作反馈方法的发展:兽医学的试点研究。
目的:本研究的目的是开发一个评分标准,为学生提供有价值的反馈,并为其结构效度收集证据。方法:马格德堡反思性写作反馈和评分标准(MaReS)是在2016年6月“DACH医学教育协会(GMA)”委员会关于反思的研讨会之后的一个迭代过程中开发的。13名兽医学生的25篇论文由3名独立评分者用MaReS和2名评分者用REFLECT评分者分两组(13篇和12篇)进行评估。根据Messick构建效度的以下组成部分收集效度证据:内容(量表开发)、反应过程(评分员手册、评分员培训、评分时间、学生评价)、内部结构(评分员间信度、IRR)以及与其他变量的关系(与REFLECT量表和全球量表的比较)。结果:分析题由12个项目组成,按3分式量表评定。作者为学生制定了一份作业,其中包括指导问题和评分手册。第一组反思性文章中MaReS条目的自由边际kappa值为-0.08 ~ 0.77,第二组为0.13 ~ 0.75。MaReS与REFLECT量表呈显著正相关(首组:r=0.92)。结论:MaReS可作为卫生专业教育中指导学生反思性写作和提供结构化反馈的有效工具。在更高的训练和更长的训练周期中使用更多的文章可能会导致更高的irr。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
GMS Journal for Medical Education
GMS Journal for Medical Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
30
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: GMS Journal for Medical Education (GMS J Med Educ) – formerly GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung – publishes scientific articles on all aspects of undergraduate and graduate education in medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, pharmacy and other health professions. Research and review articles, project reports, short communications as well as discussion papers and comments may be submitted. There is a special focus on empirical studies which are methodologically sound and lead to results that are relevant beyond the respective institution, profession or country. Please feel free to submit qualitative as well as quantitative studies. We especially welcome submissions by students. It is the mission of GMS Journal for Medical Education to contribute to furthering scientific knowledge in the German-speaking countries as well as internationally and thus to foster the improvement of teaching and learning and to build an evidence base for undergraduate and graduate education. To this end, the journal has set up an editorial board with international experts. All manuscripts submitted are subjected to a clearly structured peer review process. All articles are published bilingually in English and German and are available with unrestricted open access. Thus, GMS Journal for Medical Education is available to a broad international readership. GMS Journal for Medical Education is published as an unrestricted open access journal with at least four issues per year. In addition, special issues on current topics in medical education research are also published. Until 2015 the journal was published under its German name GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. By changing its name to GMS Journal for Medical Education, we wish to underline our international mission.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信