Interviewing skills: self-evaluation by medical students

Abstract

In an independent learning project, 52 third-year medical students carried out a structured self-assessment of two videotaped psycho-social interviews they had conducted with volunteer clients 1 year earlier, as part of a previous course. The interviews had been conducted in small tutorials with feedback from their clients, fellow students and tutors, facilitated by videotape playback. During the sequence of 16 tutorials each student had carried out an early and a late interview and had observed and participated in the discussion of the interviews of 14 peers. Students were asked to tally the frequencies of various interview behaviours, to evaluate the quality of their behaviours, and to establish priorities for future learning. The videotapes were also reliably rated by an independent observer. Students' overall self-assessments correlated 0.46 with those of the independent observer. This correlation was higher than is typically reported in studies of the validity of self-assessment. In absolute terms, the students' mean rating of interviewing performance was 3.2 (adequate plus) which was significantly lower than the observer's mean of 3.6 (adequate to good). Results are discussed in terms of Gordon's (1992) two recommendations for improving the validity of self-assessments and two further suggestions, for paired comparisons and low-threat learning environments, are added.

Internal medicine residents do not accurately assess their medical knowledge

“…Extensive use of clear benchmarks, unambiguous standards, and explicit training with feedback has been shown to improve self-assessment (Woolliscroft et al, 1993). Reviewing self-performance at different times may produce discriminations that escape isolated, independent judgment (Farnill, Hayes, & Todisco, 1997) though our study suggests that this may have to be done in a structured manner. While self-assessment is often inaccurate, medical students' evaluations of peers have been shown to be more consistent with faculty assessments than their own self-assessments (Morton & Macbeth, 1977;Sullivan, Hitchcock, & Dunnington, 1999).…”

L’apprentissage des techniques de communication : attitudes des étudiants en médecine dans un hôpital universitaire au Liban

“…Le fait que les étudiants n'admettent pas un déficit en matière de techniques de communication peut constituer un obstacle à la mise en place d'un enseignement dédié à ces dimensions. Les études montrent d'ailleurs que les auto-évaluations par les étudiants sont faiblement corrélées avec les évaluations externes [21][22][23] et que les connaissances théoriques en TC ne permettent pas une communication réussie avec les patients. Ces données de la littérature remettent en cause la réalité des capacités des étudiants libanais en matière de communication et plaident en faveur d'études ultérieures comportant une évaluation par des tiers, ainsi que des éva-luations de la satisfaction des patients.…”

Medical Students' Assessment of Education and Training in Women's Health and in Sex and Gender Differences

“…The validity and accuracy of student assessments have also been questioned, particularly self-assessments of performance. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] A recent literature review on physician self-assessment that excluded studies of medical students concluded that the ability of physicians to assess their performance is limited. 25 In contrast, most studies of medical students suggest that their ability to accurately selfevaluate their performance is moderately good, particularly in the clinical domains included in our survey.…”

“…25 In contrast, most studies of medical students suggest that their ability to accurately selfevaluate their performance is moderately good, particularly in the clinical domains included in our survey. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23] Female student ratings were lower than those of their male colleagues, particularly in their assessment of the extent to which topics were integrated into curricula, and they were more likely to request additional sex/gender-specific teaching. Reasons for the disparity are uncertain but may reflect gender differences in students' knowledge, educational expectations, or perceptions about the importance of certain topics.…”