Development and validity evidence for the resident-led large group teaching assessment instrument in the United States: a methodological study.

IF 9.3 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-23 DOI:10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.3
Ariel Shana Frey-Vogel, Kristina Dzara, Kimberly Anne Gifford, Yoon Soo Park, Justin Berk, Allison Heinly, Darcy Wolcott, Daniel Adam Hall, Shannon Elliott Scott-Vernaglia, Katherine Anne Sparger, Erica Ye-Pyng Chung
{"title":"Development and validity evidence for the resident-led large group teaching assessment instrument in the United States: a methodological study.","authors":"Ariel Shana Frey-Vogel, Kristina Dzara, Kimberly Anne Gifford, Yoon Soo Park, Justin Berk, Allison Heinly, Darcy Wolcott, Daniel Adam Hall, Shannon Elliott Scott-Vernaglia, Katherine Anne Sparger, Erica Ye-Pyng Chung","doi":"10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Despite educational mandates to assess resident teaching competence, limited instruments with validity evidence exist for this purpose. Existing instruments do not allow faculty to assess resident-led teaching in a large group format or whether teaching was interactive. This study gathers validity evidence on the use of the Resident-led Large Group Teaching Assessment Instrument (Relate), an instrument used by faculty to assess resident teaching competency. Relate comprises 23 behaviors divided into six elements: learning environment, goals and objectives, content of talk, promotion of understanding and retention, session management, and closure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Messick's unified validity framework was used for this study. Investigators used video recordings of resident-led teaching from three pediatric residency programs to develop Relate and a rater guidebook. Faculty were trained on instrument use through frame-of-reference training. Resident teaching at all sites was video-recorded during 2018-2019. Two trained faculty raters assessed each video. Descriptive statistics on performance were obtained. Validity evidence sources include: rater training effect (response process), reliability and variability (internal structure), and impact on Milestones assessment (relations to other variables).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-eight videos, from 16 residents, were analyzed. Rater training improved inter-rater reliability from 0.04 to 0.64. The Φ-coefficient reliability was 0.50. There was a significant correlation between overall Relate performance and the pediatric teaching Milestone, r = 0.34, P = .019.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Relate provides validity evidence with sufficient reliability to measure resident-led large-group teaching competence.</p>","PeriodicalId":46098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions","volume":"21 ","pages":"3"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10948941/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2024.21.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Despite educational mandates to assess resident teaching competence, limited instruments with validity evidence exist for this purpose. Existing instruments do not allow faculty to assess resident-led teaching in a large group format or whether teaching was interactive. This study gathers validity evidence on the use of the Resident-led Large Group Teaching Assessment Instrument (Relate), an instrument used by faculty to assess resident teaching competency. Relate comprises 23 behaviors divided into six elements: learning environment, goals and objectives, content of talk, promotion of understanding and retention, session management, and closure.

Methods: Messick's unified validity framework was used for this study. Investigators used video recordings of resident-led teaching from three pediatric residency programs to develop Relate and a rater guidebook. Faculty were trained on instrument use through frame-of-reference training. Resident teaching at all sites was video-recorded during 2018-2019. Two trained faculty raters assessed each video. Descriptive statistics on performance were obtained. Validity evidence sources include: rater training effect (response process), reliability and variability (internal structure), and impact on Milestones assessment (relations to other variables).

Results: Forty-eight videos, from 16 residents, were analyzed. Rater training improved inter-rater reliability from 0.04 to 0.64. The Φ-coefficient reliability was 0.50. There was a significant correlation between overall Relate performance and the pediatric teaching Milestone, r = 0.34, P = .019.

Conclusion: Relate provides validity evidence with sufficient reliability to measure resident-led large-group teaching competence.

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
美国住院医师主导的大型小组教学评估工具的开发和有效性证据:一项方法研究。
目的:尽管教育部门要求对住院医师的教学能力进行评估,但能证明其有效性的评估工具却十分有限。现有的工具不允许教员以大组形式评估住院医师主导的教学,也不允许评估教学是否具有互动性。本研究收集了 "住院医师主导的大型小组教学评估工具"(Relate)的有效性证据,该工具用于评估住院医师的教学能力。Relate 包括 23 个行为,分为六个要素:学习环境、目标和目的、谈话内容、促进理解和保持、会议管理和结束:本研究采用梅西克的统一有效性框架。研究人员使用了三个儿科住院医师培训项目的住院医师教学录像来开发Relate和评分指导手册。通过参照系培训,对教师进行了仪器使用培训。在 2018-2019 年期间,对所有地点的住院医师教学进行了视频录制。两名经过培训的教师评分员对每段视频进行评估。获得了有关表现的描述性统计数据。有效性证据来源包括:评分者培训效果(反应过程)、可靠性和可变性(内部结构)以及对里程碑评估的影响(与其他变量的关系):对来自 16 名住院医师的 48 个视频进行了分析。评分者培训将评分者之间的可靠性从 0.04 提高到 0.64。Φ 系数可靠性为 0.50。Relate的总体表现与儿科教学里程碑之间存在明显的相关性,r = 0.34,P = .019:Relate为衡量住院医师主导的大组教学能力提供了具有充分可靠性的有效性证据。
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
9.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
32
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions aims to provide readers the state-of-the art practical information on the educational evaluation for health professions so that to increase the quality of undergraduate, graduate, and continuing education. It is specialized in educational evaluation including adoption of measurement theory to medical health education, promotion of high stakes examination such as national licensing examinations, improvement of nationwide or international programs of education, computer-based testing, computerized adaptive testing, and medical health regulatory bodies. Its field comprises a variety of professions that address public medical health as following but not limited to: Care workers Dental hygienists Dental technicians Dentists Dietitians Emergency medical technicians Health educators Medical record technicians Medical technologists Midwives Nurses Nursing aides Occupational therapists Opticians Oriental medical doctors Oriental medicine dispensers Oriental pharmacists Pharmacists Physical therapists Physicians Prosthetists and Orthotists Radiological technologists Rehabilitation counselor Sanitary technicians Speech-language therapists.
期刊最新文献
The irtQ R package: a user-friendly tool for item response theory-based test data analysis and calibration. Insights into undergraduate medical student selection tools: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Importance, performance frequency, and predicted future importance of dietitians’ jobs by practicing dietitians in Korea: a survey study Presidential address 2024: the expansion of computer-based testing to numerous health professions licensing examinations in Korea, preparation of computer-based practical tests, and adoption of the medical metaverse. Development and validity evidence for the resident-led large group teaching assessment instrument in the United States: a methodological study.
×
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