scholarly journals Muddiest Point Formative Feedback in Core Materials Classes with YouTube, Blackboard, Class Warm-ups and Word Clouds

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Krause ◽  
Dale Baker ◽  
Adam Carberry ◽  
Milo Koretsky ◽  
Bill Brooks ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Krause ◽  
Dale Baker ◽  
Adam Carberry ◽  
Milo Koretsky ◽  
Bill Brooks ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie Wagner ◽  
Anita Acai ◽  
Sydney A. McQueen ◽  
Com McCarthy ◽  
Andrew McGuire ◽  
...  

Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of an assessment framework aimed at improving formative feedback practices in a Canadian orthopaedic postgraduate training program. Methods: Tool development began in 2014 and took place in 4 phases, each building upon the previous and informing the next. The reliability, validity, and educational impact of the tools were assessed on an ongoing basis, and changes were made accordingly. Results: One hundred eighty-two tools were completed and analyzed during the study period. Quantitative results suggested moderate to excellent agreement between raters (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.54-0.93), and an ability of the tools to discriminate between learners at different stages of training (p’s < 0.05). Qualitative data suggested that the tools improved both the quality and quantity of formative feedback given by assessors and had begun to foster a culture change around assessment in the program. Conclusions: The tool development, implementation, and evaluation processes detailed in this article can serve as a model for other training programs to consider as they move towards adopting competency-based approaches and refining current assessment practices.


RMD Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e001183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aurélie Najm ◽  
Alessia Alunno ◽  
Francisca Sivera ◽  
Sofia Ramiro ◽  
Catherine Haines

ObjectivesTo gain insight into current methods and practices for the assessment of competences during rheumatology training, and to explore the underlying priorities and rationales for competence assessment.MethodsWe used a qualitative approach through online focus groups (FGs) of rheumatology trainers and trainees, separately. The study included five countries—Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and the United Kingdom. A summary of current practices of assessment of competences was developed, modified and validated by the FGs based on an independent response to a questionnaire. A prioritising method (9 Diamond technique) was then used to identify and justify key assessment priorities.ResultsOverall, 26 participants (12 trainers, 14 trainees) participated in nine online FGs (2 per country, Slovenia 1 joint), totalling 12 hours of online discussion. Strong nationally (the Netherlands, UK) or institutionally (Spain, Slovenia, Denmark) standardised approaches were described. Most groups identified providing frequent formative feedback to trainees for developmental purposes as the highest priority. Most discussions identified a need for improvement, particularly in developing streamlined approaches to portfolios that remain close to clinical practice, protecting time for quality observation and feedback, and adopting systematic approaches to incorporating teamwork and professionalism into assessment systems.ConclusionThis paper presents a clearer picture of the current practice on the assessment of competences in rheumatology in five European countries and the underlying rationale of trainers’ and trainees’ priorities. This work will inform EULAR Points-to-Consider for the assessment of competences in rheumatology training across Europe.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document