Still Not Clear? Exploring the Impact of Clarifying Assessment Items on Assessor Cognition in Medical Education.

IF 1.8 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Hao Li, Louise Mui, Sarah J Aziz, Lindsay Ninivirta, David K Driman, Emily A Goebel
{"title":"Still Not Clear? Exploring the Impact of Clarifying Assessment Items on Assessor Cognition in Medical Education.","authors":"Hao Li, Louise Mui, Sarah J Aziz, Lindsay Ninivirta, David K Driman, Emily A Goebel","doi":"10.1080/10401334.2025.2542859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Assessment variability in formative assessment occurs when assessors observing a trainee performing the same task evaluate the trainee differently. One major contributor is uncertainty regarding assessment criteria, and efforts to clarify criteria are not always successful. This study explores the cognitive processes that occur in assessors' minds when assessment criteria are clarified. We interviewed clinical teaching faculty from one residency program in a single institution regarding their perceived expectations of select assessment items before and after providing clarifying criteria and how the clarification changed their perception. We analyzed the data thematically. Assessors' cognitive interaction with assessment clarification is a function of four factors: 1) Assessors' fixed ideation, 2) Content of the criteria themselves, 3) Context and setting of criterion interpretation, and 4) Interaction between the assessor and the trainee. The cognitive effects of clarifying assessment items depend not only on the assessor and criteria but additionally on their interactions within a professional and academic context. The complexity and multifactorial nature of assessment variability may explain the difficulty in mitigating criterion uncertainty.</p>","PeriodicalId":51183,"journal":{"name":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching and Learning in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2025.2542859","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Assessment variability in formative assessment occurs when assessors observing a trainee performing the same task evaluate the trainee differently. One major contributor is uncertainty regarding assessment criteria, and efforts to clarify criteria are not always successful. This study explores the cognitive processes that occur in assessors' minds when assessment criteria are clarified. We interviewed clinical teaching faculty from one residency program in a single institution regarding their perceived expectations of select assessment items before and after providing clarifying criteria and how the clarification changed their perception. We analyzed the data thematically. Assessors' cognitive interaction with assessment clarification is a function of four factors: 1) Assessors' fixed ideation, 2) Content of the criteria themselves, 3) Context and setting of criterion interpretation, and 4) Interaction between the assessor and the trainee. The cognitive effects of clarifying assessment items depend not only on the assessor and criteria but additionally on their interactions within a professional and academic context. The complexity and multifactorial nature of assessment variability may explain the difficulty in mitigating criterion uncertainty.

还是不清楚?探讨明确考核项目对医学教育评估者认知的影响。
在形成性评估中,当评估者观察到受训者执行相同的任务时,会对受训者进行不同的评估。一个主要的贡献者是关于评估标准的不确定性,而澄清标准的努力并不总是成功的。本研究探讨了当评估标准明确时,评估者的认知过程。我们采访了来自单一机构一个住院医师项目的临床教学人员,了解他们在提供澄清标准之前和之后对选择评估项目的感知期望,以及澄清如何改变他们的感知。我们对数据进行了主题分析。评估者与评估澄清的认知互动是四个因素的作用:1)评估者的固定观念,2)标准本身的内容,3)标准解释的背景和设置,4)评估者与受训者之间的互动。澄清评估项目的认知效果不仅取决于评估者和标准,还取决于他们在专业和学术背景下的相互作用。评估变异性的复杂性和多因素性质可以解释减轻标准不确定性的困难。
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
Teaching and Learning in Medicine
Teaching and Learning in Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
12.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Teaching and Learning in Medicine ( TLM) is an international, forum for scholarship on teaching and learning in the health professions. Its international scope reflects the common challenge faced by all medical educators: fostering the development of capable, well-rounded, and continuous learners prepared to practice in a complex, high-stakes, and ever-changing clinical environment. TLM''s contributors and readership comprise behavioral scientists and health care practitioners, signaling the value of integrating diverse perspectives into a comprehensive understanding of learning and performance. The journal seeks to provide the theoretical foundations and practical analysis needed for effective educational decision making in such areas as admissions, instructional design and delivery, performance assessment, remediation, technology-assisted instruction, diversity management, and faculty development, among others. TLM''s scope includes all levels of medical education, from premedical to postgraduate and continuing medical education, with articles published in the following categories:
×
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