Development and implementation of an electronic clinical formative assessment

Dental faculty and student perspectives

Michele L. Kirkup, Brooke N. Adams, Melinda L. Meadows, Richard Jackson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

A traditional summative grading structure, used at Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD) for more than 30 years, was identified by faculty as outdated for assessing students' clinical performance. In an effort to change the status quo, a feedback-driven assessment was implemented in 2012 to provide a constructive assessment tool acceptable to both faculty and students. Building on the successful non-graded clinical evaluation employed at Baylor College of Dentistry, IUSD implemented a streamlined electronic formative feedback model (FFM) to assess students' daily clinical performance. An important addition to this evaluation tool was the inclusion of routine student self-assessment opportunities. The aim of this study was to determine faculty and student response to the new assessment instrument. Following training sessions, anonymous satisfaction surveys were examined for the three user groups: clinical faculty (60% response rate), third-year (D3) students (72% response rate), and fourth-year (D4) students (57% response rate). In the results, 70% of the responding faculty members preferred the FFM over the summative model; however, 61.8% of the D4 respondents preferred the summative model, reporting insufficient assessment time and low faculty participation. The two groups of students had different responses to the self-assessment component: 70.2% of the D4 respondents appreciated clinical self-assessment compared to 46% of the D3 respondents. Overall, while some components of the FFM assessment were well received, a phased approach to implementation may have facilitated a transition more acceptable to both faculty and students. Improvements are being made in an attempt to increase overall satisfaction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)652-661
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Dental Education
Volume80
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 1 2016

Fingerprint

Dental Faculties
Dental Students
electronics
Students
dentistry
student
self-assessment
School Dentistry
grading
Dentistry
evaluation
school
performance
Group
inclusion

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • Clinical education
  • Dental education
  • Educational measurement
  • Evaluation of clinical performance
  • Self-assessment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Development and implementation of an electronic clinical formative assessment : Dental faculty and student perspectives. / Kirkup, Michele L.; Adams, Brooke N.; Meadows, Melinda L.; Jackson, Richard.

In: Journal of Dental Education, Vol. 80, No. 6, 01.06.2016, p. 652-661.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0141aede8b154f179502b232bd414ad3,
title = "Development and implementation of an electronic clinical formative assessment: Dental faculty and student perspectives",
abstract = "A traditional summative grading structure, used at Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD) for more than 30 years, was identified by faculty as outdated for assessing students' clinical performance. In an effort to change the status quo, a feedback-driven assessment was implemented in 2012 to provide a constructive assessment tool acceptable to both faculty and students. Building on the successful non-graded clinical evaluation employed at Baylor College of Dentistry, IUSD implemented a streamlined electronic formative feedback model (FFM) to assess students' daily clinical performance. An important addition to this evaluation tool was the inclusion of routine student self-assessment opportunities. The aim of this study was to determine faculty and student response to the new assessment instrument. Following training sessions, anonymous satisfaction surveys were examined for the three user groups: clinical faculty (60{\%} response rate), third-year (D3) students (72{\%} response rate), and fourth-year (D4) students (57{\%} response rate). In the results, 70{\%} of the responding faculty members preferred the FFM over the summative model; however, 61.8{\%} of the D4 respondents preferred the summative model, reporting insufficient assessment time and low faculty participation. The two groups of students had different responses to the self-assessment component: 70.2{\%} of the D4 respondents appreciated clinical self-assessment compared to 46{\%} of the D3 respondents. Overall, while some components of the FFM assessment were well received, a phased approach to implementation may have facilitated a transition more acceptable to both faculty and students. Improvements are being made in an attempt to increase overall satisfaction.",
keywords = "Assessment, Clinical education, Dental education, Educational measurement, Evaluation of clinical performance, Self-assessment",
author = "Kirkup, {Michele L.} and Adams, {Brooke N.} and Meadows, {Melinda L.} and Richard Jackson",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "652--661",
journal = "Journal of Dental Education",
issn = "0022-0337",
publisher = "American Dental Education Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development and implementation of an electronic clinical formative assessment

T2 - Dental faculty and student perspectives

AU - Kirkup, Michele L.

AU - Adams, Brooke N.

AU - Meadows, Melinda L.

AU - Jackson, Richard

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - A traditional summative grading structure, used at Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD) for more than 30 years, was identified by faculty as outdated for assessing students' clinical performance. In an effort to change the status quo, a feedback-driven assessment was implemented in 2012 to provide a constructive assessment tool acceptable to both faculty and students. Building on the successful non-graded clinical evaluation employed at Baylor College of Dentistry, IUSD implemented a streamlined electronic formative feedback model (FFM) to assess students' daily clinical performance. An important addition to this evaluation tool was the inclusion of routine student self-assessment opportunities. The aim of this study was to determine faculty and student response to the new assessment instrument. Following training sessions, anonymous satisfaction surveys were examined for the three user groups: clinical faculty (60% response rate), third-year (D3) students (72% response rate), and fourth-year (D4) students (57% response rate). In the results, 70% of the responding faculty members preferred the FFM over the summative model; however, 61.8% of the D4 respondents preferred the summative model, reporting insufficient assessment time and low faculty participation. The two groups of students had different responses to the self-assessment component: 70.2% of the D4 respondents appreciated clinical self-assessment compared to 46% of the D3 respondents. Overall, while some components of the FFM assessment were well received, a phased approach to implementation may have facilitated a transition more acceptable to both faculty and students. Improvements are being made in an attempt to increase overall satisfaction.

AB - A traditional summative grading structure, used at Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD) for more than 30 years, was identified by faculty as outdated for assessing students' clinical performance. In an effort to change the status quo, a feedback-driven assessment was implemented in 2012 to provide a constructive assessment tool acceptable to both faculty and students. Building on the successful non-graded clinical evaluation employed at Baylor College of Dentistry, IUSD implemented a streamlined electronic formative feedback model (FFM) to assess students' daily clinical performance. An important addition to this evaluation tool was the inclusion of routine student self-assessment opportunities. The aim of this study was to determine faculty and student response to the new assessment instrument. Following training sessions, anonymous satisfaction surveys were examined for the three user groups: clinical faculty (60% response rate), third-year (D3) students (72% response rate), and fourth-year (D4) students (57% response rate). In the results, 70% of the responding faculty members preferred the FFM over the summative model; however, 61.8% of the D4 respondents preferred the summative model, reporting insufficient assessment time and low faculty participation. The two groups of students had different responses to the self-assessment component: 70.2% of the D4 respondents appreciated clinical self-assessment compared to 46% of the D3 respondents. Overall, while some components of the FFM assessment were well received, a phased approach to implementation may have facilitated a transition more acceptable to both faculty and students. Improvements are being made in an attempt to increase overall satisfaction.

KW - Assessment

KW - Clinical education

KW - Dental education

KW - Educational measurement

KW - Evaluation of clinical performance

KW - Self-assessment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84973303642&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84973303642&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 80

SP - 652

EP - 661

JO - Journal of Dental Education

JF - Journal of Dental Education

SN - 0022-0337

IS - 6

ER -