Student Self-assessment: Reflecting on Physician Assistant Educator's Perceptions and Current Practices in Physician Assistant Training.

Rachel Ditoro, Joshua Bernstein
{"title":"Student Self-assessment: Reflecting on Physician Assistant Educator's Perceptions and Current Practices in Physician Assistant Training.","authors":"Rachel Ditoro,&nbsp;Joshua Bernstein","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine relationships between physician assistant (PA) educators' perspectives on students' self-assessment (SA) accuracy and students' use of SA education practices and types of abilities assessed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using correlation analysis and a novel, online survey, PA educators were asked about their perceptions of students' SA accuracy in relation to SA educational activities and assessed abilities.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 308 educators responded. Most respondents used at least one type of SA activity, with feedback and practice being the most common types and comparative assessment, the least common type. Most respondents indicated that students self-assess noncognitive abilities more than cognitive abilities, with SA of communication skills occurring most. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis with a significant, small correlation noted between the frequency of activities and educators' overall perceptions of students' SA accuracy (r = 0.15, P = .02) and SA accuracy of cognitive abilities (r = 0.17, P = .02). Educators' perceptions of students' SA accuracy were positively skewed, regardless of student training level (ie, didactic and clinical training phases). A mild predictive relationship exists between overall perception of students' SA accuracy and how frequently educators use SA activities (r = 0.29, P = .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although respondents indicated they used practice and feedback activities, providing instruction on how to self-assess and using comparative evaluations to calibrate SAs will improve accuracy. Further research is needed to understand why educators perceive PA students' SA abilities as more accurate, regardless of training level.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000520","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine relationships between physician assistant (PA) educators' perspectives on students' self-assessment (SA) accuracy and students' use of SA education practices and types of abilities assessed.

Methods: Using correlation analysis and a novel, online survey, PA educators were asked about their perceptions of students' SA accuracy in relation to SA educational activities and assessed abilities.

Results: A total of 308 educators responded. Most respondents used at least one type of SA activity, with feedback and practice being the most common types and comparative assessment, the least common type. Most respondents indicated that students self-assess noncognitive abilities more than cognitive abilities, with SA of communication skills occurring most. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis with a significant, small correlation noted between the frequency of activities and educators' overall perceptions of students' SA accuracy (r = 0.15, P = .02) and SA accuracy of cognitive abilities (r = 0.17, P = .02). Educators' perceptions of students' SA accuracy were positively skewed, regardless of student training level (ie, didactic and clinical training phases). A mild predictive relationship exists between overall perception of students' SA accuracy and how frequently educators use SA activities (r = 0.29, P = .05).

Conclusion: Although respondents indicated they used practice and feedback activities, providing instruction on how to self-assess and using comparative evaluations to calibrate SAs will improve accuracy. Further research is needed to understand why educators perceive PA students' SA abilities as more accurate, regardless of training level.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学生自我评估:反思医师助理教育者对医师助理培训的认知和当前实践。
目的:本研究旨在探讨医师助理(PA)教育者对学生自我评估(SA)准确性的看法与学生使用SA教育实践和评估能力类型之间的关系。方法:采用相关分析和一项新颖的在线调查,询问PA教育者对学生在SA教育活动和评估能力方面的SA准确性的看法。结果:308名教育工作者参与了问卷调查。大多数应答者至少使用一种SA活动,反馈和实践是最常见的类型,比较评估是最不常见的类型。大多数被调查者认为学生对非认知能力的自我评价多于对认知能力的自我评价,其中沟通能力的自我评价最多。使用Spearman相关系数进行相关分析,发现活动频率与教育者对学生SA准确性的总体认知(r = 0.15, P = 0.02)和认知能力SA准确性(r = 0.17, P = 0.02)之间存在显著的小相关性。无论学生的培训水平(即教学和临床培训阶段)如何,教育工作者对学生SA准确性的看法都是正向倾斜的。学生对SA准确性的总体感知与教育者使用SA活动的频率之间存在轻微的预测关系(r = 0.29, P = 0.05)。结论:尽管受访者表示他们使用了实践和反馈活动,但提供关于如何自我评估和使用比较评估来校准sa的指导将提高准确性。需要进一步的研究来理解为什么教育工作者认为PA学生的SA能力更准确,而不管训练水平如何。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
期刊最新文献
Using Four-Component Instructional Design to Create an Interactive Point-of-Care Ultrasound Curriculum for Physician Associate Students. Strengthening the Multiple-Choice Assessment: Improving Item-Writing Skills of Physician Assistant Educators. Physician Assistant Training, Collaboration, and Practice Act Legislation: Perspectives From Practicing Physician Assistants. Compliance With Accreditation Standards on Diversity: Is Institutional Support the Missing Link? Viewing Medical Education Through the Lens of Second Language Acquisition.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1