The Reliability of Medical Student Ratings of Clinical Teaching

Solomon, David; Speer, Alice J.; Rosebraugh, Curtis J.; DiPette, Donald J.

doi:10.1177/016327879702000306

Cited by 34 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2 These evaluations have been reported to be reliable 3 and have validity. 4 Many studies have sought to identify the attributes that learners associate with effective clinical teachers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Student Evaluation of Faculty Physicians: Gender Differences in Teaching Evaluations

Morgan

Purkiss

Porter

et al. 2016

Journal of Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Porter, Annie C.; Lypson, Monica L.; Santen, Sally A.; Christner, Jennifer G.; Grum, Cyrl M.; and Hammoud, Maya M., ,"Student evaluation of faculty physicians: gender differences in teaching evaluations." Journal of Women's Health. 25,5. 453-456. (2016 Purpose: To investigate whether there is a difference in medical student teaching evaluations for male and female clinical physician faculty. Methods:The authors examined all teaching evaluations completed by clinical students at one North American medical school in the surgery, obstetrics and gynecology, pediatrics, and internal medicine clinical rotations from 2008 to 2012. The authors focused on how students rated physician faculty on their ''overall quality of teaching'' using a 5-point response scale (1 = Poor to 5 = Excellent). Linear mixed-effects models provided estimated mean differences in evaluation outcomes by faculty gender.Results: There were 14,107 teaching evaluations of 965 physician faculty. Of these evaluations, 7688 (54%) were for male physician faculty and 6419 (46%) were for female physician faculty. Female physicians received significantly lower mean evaluation scores in all four rotations. The discrepancy was largest in the surgery rotation (males = 4.23, females = 4.01, p = 0.003). Pediatrics showed the next greatest difference (males = 4.44, females = 4.29, p = 0.009), followed by obstetrics and gynecology (males = 4.38, females = 4.26, p = 0.026), and internal medicine (males = 4.35, females = 4.27, p = 0.043). Conclusions: Female physicians received lower teaching evaluations in all four core clinical rotations. This comprehensive examination adds to the medical literature by illuminating subtle differences in evaluations based on physician gender, and provides further evidence of disparities for women in academic medicine.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Student Evaluation of Faculty Physicians: Gender Differences in Teaching Evaluations

Morgan

Purkiss

Porter

et al. 2016

Journal of Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…instructional effectiveness. Otherwise, decisions to be made may be misleading (Solomon et al, 1997). Unfortunately, validity is one of the points on which SET has been receiving severe criticism.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement Invariance of Student Evaluation of Teaching across Groups defined by Course-Related Variables

Kalender¹

2015

IOJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, comparability of scores from student evaluation of teaching forms was investigated. This is an important issue because scores given by students are used in decision making in higher education institutions. Three course-related variables (grade level, course type, and course credit) were used to define student subgroups. Then, multi-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to assess invariance of factorial structure, factor loadings and factor means across groups. It was found that although a common factorial structure held across groups, fully invariant factor loadings were observed only across instructors who teach different course types. For other groups, only partial invariance of factor loadings was obtained. Analyses also revealed that none of the subgroups had invariant factor means, indicating a possible bias. Results indicate that comparison of instructors based on student ratings may not be valid as it is mostly assumed.

show abstract

“…Many evaluation instruments have been developed to provide feedback to clinical teachers, department heads, and program directors. There has been a considerable effort devoted to investigate the psychometric properties of instruments to assess clinical teaching effectiveness (Ramsbottom-Lucier et al 1994;Solomon et al 1997;Bardes et al 1998;Litzelman et al 1998Litzelman et al , 1999Copeland & Hewson 1999;Steiner et al 2000;Williams et al 2001Williams et al , 2002Snell et al 2002;van der Hem-Stokroos et al 2003;Beckman et al 2004Beckman et al , 2005Leamon & Fields 2005;Bierer & Hull 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of an instrument to assess clinical teaching with linkage to CanMEDS roles: A psychometric analysis

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Assessment of clinical teaching by learners is of value to teachers, department heads, and program directors, and must be comprehensive and feasible.Aims: To review published evaluation instruments with psychometric evaluations and to develop and psychometrically evaluate an instrument for assessing clinical teaching with linkages to the CanMEDS roles.Method: We developed a 19-item questionnaire to reflect 10 domains relevant to teaching and the CanMEDS roles. A total of 317 medical learners assessed 170 instructors. Fourteen (4.4 %) clinical clerks, 229 (72.3%) residents, and 53 (16.7%) fellows assessed 170 instructors. Twenty-one (6.6%) did not specify their position.Results: A mean number of eight raters assessed each instructor. The internal consistency reliability of the 19-item instrument was Cronbach's ¼ 0.95. The generalizability coefficient (Ep

show abstract

The Reliability of Medical Student Ratings of Clinical Teaching

Cited by 34 publications

References 6 publications

Student Evaluation of Faculty Physicians: Gender Differences in Teaching Evaluations

Student Evaluation of Faculty Physicians: Gender Differences in Teaching Evaluations

Measurement Invariance of Student Evaluation of Teaching across Groups defined by Course-Related Variables

The development of an instrument to assess clinical teaching with linkage to CanMEDS roles: A psychometric analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About