Levels of agreement between student and staff assessments of clinical skills in performing cavity preparation in artificial teeth

Diego, Jonathan San; Newton, Tim; Quinn, Barry Francis Arthur; Cox, Margaret; Woolford, Mark

doi:10.1111/eje.12059

Cited by 39 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have also found disagreement between student self-assessments and faculty assessments (10,15,(17)(18)(19). However, unlike our findings, previous research has found that poorly performing students tend to overrate their performance, while high-performing students are more self-critical and tend to underrate it (15,17,18,20). Other studies have found that students are more likely to overestimate their competence than their tutors (10,19).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Agreement between faculty member assessments and student self‐assessments in a preclinical endodontic programme

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to evaluate the agreement between faculty member assessments and student self-assessments regarding the latter's performance in a preclinical endodontic course. The data were collected from 30 undergraduate dental students enrolled in a preclinical endodontic course at Taibah University in Saudi Arabia during 2017-2018 academic year. One course coordinator calibrated the grading method and distributed it to all staff and students. Students were asked to appraise their own performance of a root canal treatment for a tooth with a single canal. After the student self-assessments, two staff members also graded student performance using the same grading scale. The assessment agreement was compared between student and faculty evaluations using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test with a 0.05 significance level. There was a significant difference (P < 0.05) between student and staff member assessment scores. Student scores were lower and had a weak reliability compared to those of staff members.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Agreement between faculty member assessments and student self‐assessments in a preclinical endodontic programme

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tasks 3-5 involved operating on a mandibular first molar situated in the lower jaw: with a small carious lesion (task 3), a carious lesion already in the The previous scoring system used by the faculty for the phantom-head laboratory involved assessing the angle of entry, the hold of the instruments, the area of caries remaining from both the cavity wall and the cavity floor, the avoiding of pulp exposure, and the conservation of healthy tooth structure. 24 For this study, we developed a similar scoring system for hapTEL cavity preparation tasks named the hapTEL Accuracy of Caries Excavation (ACE) score) ( Table 2) to assess the VRS data recorded by the log-files.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26 The quantitative nature of the feedback allows students to monitor their progress objectively and institutions to assess their students for formative or summative exams. 24 Electronic learning assessment methods are encouraged by the Higher Education Students who delayed first contact performed better. 23 This occurred during the hapTEL sessions with one to two tutors circulating amongst the students, reminding them of their educational goals and reinforcing the experience for the longer term biological aims in real patient situations.…”

Section: Figure 2 Distribution Of Overall Accuracy Of Caries Excavatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…25,27 A study conducted by San Diego et al concluded that formative assessment should be provided on a continual basis. 24 Electronic learning assessment methods are encouraged by the Higher Education Students who delayed first contact performed better. The ACE scoring system was applied to all attempts in tasks 2-5, and an analysis was performed to examine correlation with delay to first contact and time spent working on the tooth.…”

Section: Figure 2 Distribution Of Overall Accuracy Of Caries Excavatmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Scoring System for Assessing Learning Progression of Dental Students’ Clinical Skills Using Haptic Virtual Workstations

Ria

Cox²,

Quinn³

et al. 2018

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to develop and test a scoring system to assess the learning progression of novice dental students using haptic virtual workstations. For the study, 101 first-year dental students at a UK dental school conducted one practice task (task 1) and four simulated cavity removal tasks (tasks 2-5) of increasing difficulty over two laboratory sessions in 2015. Performance data on the students' attempts were recorded as haptic technology-enhanced learning (hapTEL) log-files showing the percentage of caries, healthy tissue, and pulp removed. On-screen results were photographed and submitted by the students to the tutors. A scoring system named the Accuracy of Caries Excavation (ACE) score was devised to score these results and achieve an even distribution of scores and a calculated combined score. A total of 127 individual logged attempts by 80% of the students over sessions 1 and 2 were recorded and submitted to the tutors. The mean ACE scores for both sessions for tasks 2 through 5 were 9.2, 11.6, 6.4, and 4.9, respectively; for Session 2 (tasks 3-5), scores were 12.4, 6.7, and 5.0, respectively (p<0.001). The average performance on task 3, which was attempted in similar numbers during both sessions, improved from the first to the second session (8.14 vs. 12.38; p=0.009). Using the HapTEL system in a first-year BDS curriculum improved the students' performance of simulated cavity preparation after practicing over two sessions. Use of the ACE scoring system enabled tutors to make consistent assessments across a large student cohort and provided an objective method of formative assessment.

show abstract

“…[5][6][7] Simulation training using mannequins helps undergraduate students understand the principles or techniques of their respective dental fields. 8,9 In general, however, patients in the oral unit have several dental morbidities. To teach technical skills effectively, existing jaw models focus on specific dental diseases; however, these models cannot replicate the oral conditions of actual patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Introduction of integrated dental training jaw models and rubric criteria

Tenkumo

Fuji

Ikawa

et al. 2018

Eur J Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of introducing integrated jaw models, rubric criteria and homework tasks to a total clinical simulation training course to improve the clinical competence of preclinical dental students. Methods A total simulation training course, which involved six clinical dentistry departments, was held for 110 preclinical students in 2014 and 2015. We prepared integrated jaw models having several morbidities along with corresponding medical information and homework tasks. The students formulated diagnoses and devised treatment plans before performing dental treatment on the mannequin under the direction of instructors from the respective clinical departments. Their performance was assessed by both students and instructors using the rubric criteria. Results Based on quantitative evaluations, the introduction of integrated jaw models appeared to improve the students' ability to formulate diagnoses and devise dental treatment plans and to understand the respective clinical dentistry disciplines. The rubric criteria provided immediate feedback for the students. Based on a comparison of rubric scores, students tended to significantly underestimate their own performance compared with instructors. Moreover, the introduction of homework tasks improved student seriousness. Conclusion Introducing integrated jaw models, rubric criteria and homework tasks to a total simulation training course may be a good approach for improving student performance in terms of dental diagnoses and treatment.

show abstract

Levels of agreement between student and staff assessments of clinical skills in performing cavity preparation in artificial teeth

Abstract: Students tend to overrate the quality of their performance when compared with staff ratings. Task difficulty has an impact on levels of agreement.

Cited by 39 publications

References 15 publications

Agreement between faculty member assessments and student self‐assessments in a preclinical endodontic programme

Agreement between faculty member assessments and student self‐assessments in a preclinical endodontic programme

A Scoring System for Assessing Learning Progression of Dental Students’ Clinical Skills Using Haptic Virtual Workstations

Introduction of integrated dental training jaw models and rubric criteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About