E4D Compare Software: An Alternative to Faculty Grading in Dental Education

Abstract

The traditional method of evaluating student tooth preparations in preclinical courses has relied on the judgment of experienced clinicians primarily utilizing visual inspection. At times, certain aids such as reduction matrices or reduction instruments of known dimension are used to assist the evaluator in determining the grade. Despite the skill and experience of the evaluator, there is still a signiicant element of uncertainty and inconsistency in these methods. Students may perceive this inconsistency as a form of subjective, arbitrary, and empirical evaluation, which often results in students' focusing more on the grade than the actual learning or developing skills necessary to accomplish the preparation properly. Perceptions of favoritism, discrimination, and unfairness (whether verbalized or not) may interfere with the learning process. This study reports the use of a new experimental scanning and evaluation software program (E4D Compare) that can consistently and reliably scan a student's tooth preparation and compare it to a known (faculty-determined) standardized preparation. An actual numerical evaluation is generated by the E4D Compare software, thereby making subjective judgments by the faculty unnecessary. In this study, the computer-generated result was found to be more precise than the hand-graded method.

Comparing feedback from faculty interactions and virtual assessment software in the development of psychomotor skills in preclinical fixed prosthodontics

“…In an attempt to remove the “human factor” from assessment of dental student performance, virtual assessment software (Compare software, Planmeca/E4D Technologies, Richardson, TX, USA) has been developed for use in preclinical fixed prosthodontics. Software‐generated comparison percentages calculated by virtual comparison of student preparations versus a standard preparation have been suggested as a reliable and consistent method of student assessment (Renne et al, ). However, to date, no correlation has been found between faculty assessments of student work and comparison percentages (Callan, Haywood, Cooper, Furness, & Looney, ).…”

Development of an assessment strategy in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course using virtual assessment software—Part 2

“…In contrast, Comparison% uses the entire area of the preparation, including the entire occlusal table, to calculate the percentage of matched areas. Moreover, Comparison% calculated by Compare software (Planmeca/E4D Technologies) consistently assesses student work with no subjectivity (Renne et al, ). In contrast, when a calibrated faculty member evaluates the same work on separate occasions, they may assign different scores each time (Lilley et al, ; Fuller, ; Salvendy et al, ).…”

“…Virtual assessment software was proposed as a mechanism to remove faculty‐based subjective error from dental student assessments by providing an objective means of evaluation (Schiff, Salvendy, Root, Ferguson, & Cunningham, ; Renne et al, ). In support of the idea, calculation of comparison percentage (Comparison%) by virtual assessment software was shown to increase the objectivity and reliability of student assessment in the simulated laboratory setting (Renne et al, ). However, Comparison% does not take into consideration the principles of tooth preparation, such as axial wall height (AWH) and total occlusal convergence, when evaluating student performance (Renne et al, ).…”

“…In support of the idea, calculation of comparison percentage (Comparison%) by virtual assessment software was shown to increase the objectivity and reliability of student assessment in the simulated laboratory setting (Renne et al, ). However, Comparison% does not take into consideration the principles of tooth preparation, such as axial wall height (AWH) and total occlusal convergence, when evaluating student performance (Renne et al, ). In addition, the validity of the use of Comparison% to assess preparation for complete coverage restorations has been questioned (Callan, Haywood, Cooper, Furness, & Looney, ).…”

Development of an assessment strategy in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course using virtual assessment software—Part 1

“…In an attempt to eliminate human bias from assessment of dental student work, E4D Technologies developed a virtual assessment tool. In , Renne et al suggested that technology could provide an alternative to faculty grading of dental student performance. This study reported that software could be used to consistently and reliably compare student tooth preparations to standard preparations.…”