Cargando…

Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students

BACKGROUND: Although peer assessment has been used for evaluating performance of medical students and practicing doctors, it has not been studied as a method to distribute a common group work mark equitably to medical students working in large groups where tutors cannot observe all students constant...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cook, Alex R, Hartman, Mikael, Luo, Nan, Sng, Judy, Fong, Ngan Phoon, Lim, Wei Yen, Chen, Mark I-Cheng, Wong, Mee Lian, Rajaraman, Natarajan, Lee, Jeannette Jen-Mai, Koh, Gerald Choon-Huat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5607620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28931382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0987-z
_version_ 1783265325322600448
author Cook, Alex R
Hartman, Mikael
Luo, Nan
Sng, Judy
Fong, Ngan Phoon
Lim, Wei Yen
Chen, Mark I-Cheng
Wong, Mee Lian
Rajaraman, Natarajan
Lee, Jeannette Jen-Mai
Koh, Gerald Choon-Huat
author_facet Cook, Alex R
Hartman, Mikael
Luo, Nan
Sng, Judy
Fong, Ngan Phoon
Lim, Wei Yen
Chen, Mark I-Cheng
Wong, Mee Lian
Rajaraman, Natarajan
Lee, Jeannette Jen-Mai
Koh, Gerald Choon-Huat
author_sort Cook, Alex R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although peer assessment has been used for evaluating performance of medical students and practicing doctors, it has not been studied as a method to distribute a common group work mark equitably to medical students working in large groups where tutors cannot observe all students constantly. METHODS: The authors developed and evaluated a mathematical formulation whereby a common group mark could be distributed among group members using peer assessment of individual contributions to group work, maintaining inter-group variation in group work scores. This was motivated by community health projects undertaken by large groups of year four medical students at the National University of Singapore, and the new and old formulations are presented via application to 263 students in seven groups of 36 to 40 during the academic year 2012/2013. RESULTS: This novel formulation produced a less clustered mark distribution that rewarded students who contributed more to their team. Although collusion among some members to form a voting alliance and ‘personal vendettas’ were potential problems, the former was not detected and the latter had little impact on the overall grade a student received when working in a large group. The majority of students thought the new formulation was fairer. CONCLUSIONS: The new formulation is easy to implement and arguably awards grades more equitably in modules where group work is a major component. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-017-0987-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5607620
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56076202017-09-24 Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students Cook, Alex R Hartman, Mikael Luo, Nan Sng, Judy Fong, Ngan Phoon Lim, Wei Yen Chen, Mark I-Cheng Wong, Mee Lian Rajaraman, Natarajan Lee, Jeannette Jen-Mai Koh, Gerald Choon-Huat BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Although peer assessment has been used for evaluating performance of medical students and practicing doctors, it has not been studied as a method to distribute a common group work mark equitably to medical students working in large groups where tutors cannot observe all students constantly. METHODS: The authors developed and evaluated a mathematical formulation whereby a common group mark could be distributed among group members using peer assessment of individual contributions to group work, maintaining inter-group variation in group work scores. This was motivated by community health projects undertaken by large groups of year four medical students at the National University of Singapore, and the new and old formulations are presented via application to 263 students in seven groups of 36 to 40 during the academic year 2012/2013. RESULTS: This novel formulation produced a less clustered mark distribution that rewarded students who contributed more to their team. Although collusion among some members to form a voting alliance and ‘personal vendettas’ were potential problems, the former was not detected and the latter had little impact on the overall grade a student received when working in a large group. The majority of students thought the new formulation was fairer. CONCLUSIONS: The new formulation is easy to implement and arguably awards grades more equitably in modules where group work is a major component. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-017-0987-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5607620/ /pubmed/28931382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0987-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cook, Alex R
Hartman, Mikael
Luo, Nan
Sng, Judy
Fong, Ngan Phoon
Lim, Wei Yen
Chen, Mark I-Cheng
Wong, Mee Lian
Rajaraman, Natarajan
Lee, Jeannette Jen-Mai
Koh, Gerald Choon-Huat
Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title_full Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title_fullStr Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title_full_unstemmed Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title_short Using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
title_sort using peer review to distribute group work marks equitably between medical students
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5607620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28931382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0987-z
work_keys_str_mv AT cookalexr usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT hartmanmikael usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT luonan usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT sngjudy usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT fongnganphoon usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT limweiyen usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT chenmarkicheng usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT wongmeelian usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT rajaramannatarajan usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT leejeannettejenmai usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents
AT kohgeraldchoonhuat usingpeerreviewtodistributegroupworkmarksequitablybetweenmedicalstudents