Keywords
peer-feedback
effective feedback
How to Cite
Abstract
Modern medical education demands an array of new skills and competencies, necessary for quality patient care, in the always growing complexity of health care services. Traditional assessment methods have proven inadequate for the formative evaluation required at the workplace of these domains being incorporated into reforming curricula. Research by educational experts has shown effective peer feedback to be one of the adequate instruments to be used for assessment of formative nature. Numerous advantages of peer feedback have been documented in regard to competencies such as communication, professional behavior and self-reflection. Care must be taken when incorporating new educational strategies, developed in settings that differ in social and cultural contexts. Adaptations might be necessary and are done best if framed by guidelines derived from research. Collaborative construction of the instrument is desirable to enhance acceptance. Psychometric aspects of peer feedback have been demonstrated to be adequate, given enough sampling is provided.Boud D, Cohen R, Sampson J. Peer learning and assessment. Assess Eval High Educ. 1999;24:413-426.
Harden R. International medical education and future directions: a global perspective. Acad Med. 2006;81(12):S22-29.
Irby D, Cooke M, O’Brien B. Calls for reform of medical education by the Carnegie Foundation for the advancementof teaching: 1910-2010. Acad Med. 2010;85(2):220-7.
Parmelee D, Michaelsen L K, Cook, Hudes P. Team-based learning: A practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 65. Med Teach. 2012;34:e275-87.
Henderson P, Ferguson-Smith A, Johnson M. Developing essential professional skills: a framework for teaching and learning about feedback. BMC Med Educ. 2005:5:1-6.
Baartman L, Bastiens T, Kirschner P, Van der Vleuten C. Evaluating assessment quality in competence-based education:a qualitative comparison of two frameworks. Educ Res Rev. 2007;2:114-29.
Holmboe E, Ward D, Reznick R, et al. Faculty development in assessment: The missing link in competency-based medical education. Acad Med. 2011;86:460-7.
Brown S. Assessment for learning. LATHE. 2004;1:81-9.
Epstein R. Assessment in medical education. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(4):387-96.
Sargeant J, Mann K, Van der Vleuten C, Metsemaker J. Reflection: a link between receiving and using assessment feedback. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2008;13(3):275-288.
Dent J, Harden R. A practical guide for medical teachers. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2009.
Boon K, Turner J. Ethical and professional conduct of medical students: review of current assessment measures and controversies. J Med Ethics. 2004;30:221-6.
Wood L, Hassell A, Whitehouse A, Bullock A, Wall D. A literature review of multi-source feedback systems within and without health services, leading to 10 tips for their successful design. Med Teach. 2006;28(7):e185-91.
Schönrock-Adema J, Heijne-Penninga M, Van Duijn M, Geertsma J, Chen-Schotanus J. Assessment of professional behavior in undergraduate medical education: peer assessment enhances performance. Med Educ. 2007;41:836-42.
Müller P. Incorporating professionalism into medical education: the Mayo Clinic experience. Keio J Med. 2009;58(3):133-43.
Sluijsmans D. Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills [Doctoral dissertation]. [internet]. Open University of the Netherlands, The Netherlands; 2002. Disponible en: http://indl.handle.net/1820/1034.
Milan F, Parish S, Reichgott M. A model for educational feedback based on clinical communication skills strategies. Teach Learn Med. 2006;18:42-7.
Hawkins R, Holmboe E. Constructing an evaluation system for en educational program. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Mosby-Elsevier; 2008.
Van Zundert M6, Sluijmans D, Van Merriënboer J. Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learn Instr. 2010;20(4):270-9.
Harden R. Outcome-based education: the future is today. Med Teach. 2007;29:625-9.
Archer J. State of the science in health professional education: Effective feedback. Med Educ. 2010;44:101-8.
Arnold L, Shue C, Kritt B, Ginsburg S, Stern D. Medical students’ view on peer assessment of professionalism. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:819-24.
Bryan R, Krych A, Carmichael S, Viggiano T, Pawlina W. Assessing professionalism in early medical education: experience with peer evaluation and self-evaluation in the Gross Anatomy course. Annals Acad Med Singapore. 2005;34:486-91.
Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M. Peer assessment in problem-based learning: A qualitative study. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2007;12:169-86.
Van der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L, Scheel F, et al. The assessment of professional competence: building blocks for theory development. Best Pract Res Cl Ob. 2010;24:703-19.
Sambell K, Mc Dowell L. The construction of the hidden curriculum: message and meanings in the assessment of student learning. Assess Eval High Educ. 1998;23 (4):391-402.
Sluijsmans D, Dochy F, Moerkerke G. Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learn Environ Res. 1999;1:293-319.
Kamp R, Van Berkel H, Popeijus H, et al. Midterm peer feedback in problem-based learning groups: the effect on individual contribution and achievement. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2014;19(1):53-69.
Cate T. Summative assessment of medical students in the affective domain. Med Teach. 2000;22:40-3.
Boud D, Kalchikov N. Quantitative studies of self-assessment in higher education: a critical analysis of findings. High Educ. 1989;18:529-49.
Norcini J. Peer assessment of competence. Med Educ. 2003;37:539-43.
Davies H, Archer J. Multi source feedback: development and practical aspects. Clin Teach. 2005;2(2):77-81.
Kluger A, DeNisi A. The effects of feedback intervention on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychol Bull. 1996;119(2):254-84.
Dominick P, Reilly R, McGourty J. The effects of peer-feedback on team member motivation. Group Organ Manage. 1997;22(4):508-20.
Geister S, Konradt U, Hertel G. Effects of process feedback on motivation, satisfaction and performance in virtual teams. Small Gr Res. 2006;37(5):459-89.
Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res. 2007;77(1):81-112.
Kamp R, Dolmans D, Van Berkel H, Schmidt H. The relationship between students’ small group activities, time spent on self- study and achievement. High Educ. 2012;64:385-97.
Van del Vleuten C. The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ. 1996;1(1):41-67.
Prins F, Sluijmans D, Kirschner P. Feedback for general practitioners in training: Quality, styles and preferences. Adv Health Sci Edu. 2006;11:289-303.
Van den Bossche P, Segers M, Jansen N. Transfer of training: the role of feedback in supportive social networks. Int J Tra Dev. 2010;14(2):81-94.
Epstein R, Hundert E. Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002;287(2):226-35.
Shue C, Arnold L, Stern D. Maximizing participation in peer assessment of professionalism: The students speak. Acad Med. 2005;80(10):S1-S5.
Segers M, Gijbels D, Gijselaers W. Redesigning a learning and assessment environment: The influence on student’s perceptions of assessment demands and their learning strategies. Stud Educ Eval. 2006;32(3):223-42.
Stevens F, Simmonds-Goulbourne J. Globalization and the modernization of medical education. Med Teach. 2012;34: e684-e689.
Schwarz M. Globalization and medical education. Med Teach. 2001;23:533-4.
Hawthorne L, Minas I, Singh B. A case study in the globalization of medical education: assisting overseas-borne students at the University of Melbourne. Med Teach. 2004;26:150-9.
Eva K. Assessing tutorial-based assessment. Adv Health Sci Edu. 2001; 6:243-57.
Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M, Haynes M. An analysis of peer, self and tutor assessment in problem-based learning tutorials. Med Teach. 2007;29:122-32.
Kamp R, Dolmans D, Van Berkel H, Schmidt H. Can students adequately evaluate the activities of their peers in PBL? Med Teach. 2011;33:145-50.
Van der Vleuten C, Norman G, De Graaf E. Pitfalls in the pursuit of objectivity: issues of reliability. Med Educ. 1991;25(2):110-8.
Davis M, Ponnamperuma G, Wall D. A practical guide for medical teachers. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2009.
Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela V, et al. Criteria for good assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach. 2011;33:206-14.
Van der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L. Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes. Med Educ. 2005;39:309-17.
This journal is registered under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License. Thus, this work may be reproduced, distributed, and publicly shared in digital format, as long as the names of the authors and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana are acknowledged. Others are allowed to quote, adapt, transform, auto-archive, republish, and create based on this material, for any purpose (even commercial ones), provided the authorship is duly acknowledged, a link to the original work is provided, and it is specified if changes have been made. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana does not hold the rights of published works and the authors are solely responsible for the contents of their works; they keep the moral, intellectual, privacy, and publicity rights.
Approving the intervention of the work (review, copy-editing, translation, layout) and the following outreach, are granted through an use license and not through an assignment of rights. This means the journal and Pontificia Universidad Javeriana cannot be held responsible for any ethical malpractice by the authors. As a consequence of the protection granted by the use license, the journal is not required to publish recantations or modify information already published, unless the errata stems from the editorial management process. Publishing contents in this journal does not generate royalties for contributors.