Not so simple: evaluating consequences validity evidence for a workplace-based assessment in surgery

Author:

Zhao Nina W.ORCID,Haddock Lindsey M.,O’Brien Bridget C.

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Workplace-based assessments (WBAs) of trainee operative skills are widely used in surgical education as formative assessments to facilitate feedback for learning, but the evidence to support this purpose is mixed. Further evaluation of the consequences of assessment use and score interpretation is needed to understand if there is alignment between the intended and actual impacts of assessment. This study examines consequences validity evidence for an operative WBA, exploring whether WBA use is consistent with the goals of formative assessment for learning. Methods Eight residents and 9 faculty within the Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery at a tertiary institution completed semi-structured interviews after participating in a pilot of a surgical WBA, the System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning in the OR (SIMPL OR). Residents received feedback from attendings via both scores (performance and autonomy ratings) and recorded dictations. Interview questions explored faculty and resident perceptions of feedback behaviors and perceived impacts on their teaching or learning practices. Three researchers analyzed transcripts using directed qualitative content analysis to generate themes and evaluated how the perceived impacts aligned with formative purposes for assessment and score use. Results Both faculty and residents identified intended impacts of formative assessment, including (1) greater emphasis on feedback, (2) support for a postoperative feedback routine, and (3) facilitation of case-specific reflection. Residents also used score and verbal feedback for (1) calibrating case perceptions and (2) benchmarking performance to an external standard. The recorded dictations supported feedback by (1) providing context for ratings, (2) facilitating review of dictated feedback, and (3) prompting faculty for deliberate feedback. Unintended impacts included: (1) emotional discomfort during the assessment process, (2) increased feedback frequency but not diversity or quality, (3) inadequate support for feedback conversations, and (4) limited next steps for teaching or learning. Assessment usage declined over the pilot period. Conclusions The validity evidence gathered in this study suggests an operative WBA can be used for formative purposes to improve perceptions of feedback, but unintended consequences and implementation challenges limited ultimate impacts on teaching and learning. User perspectives can add important elements to consequences validity evidence and should be further evaluated in different implementation settings to better understand how WBAs can achieve their formative goals.

Funder

School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3