From behaviours to attributions: further concerns regarding the evaluation of professionalism

Ginsburg, Shiphra; Regehr, Glenn; Mylopoulos, Maria

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03335.x

Cited by 53 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is suggested that the frequent 3 and 4 ratings may be reflective of two trends. Firstly, raters tend to avoid extremes of scales when rating (Streiner and Norman 2008), and secondly, raters tend to be reluctant to give low ratings (Ginsburg, Regehr, and Mylopoulos 2009). It is possible, therefore, that the range of student performance was, in reality, more varied than these results suggest.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standardised patients (SPs) are increasingly utilised in health sciences education to assist students in the development of clinical competencies, including interviewing skills. This study investigated the development and validation of a rating scale for formative assessment of speech pathology students in an interview with an SP. Participants in this study were 76 undergraduate speech pathology students and 10 clinical educators who participated in a simulated clinic module. As part of the module, pairs of students interviewed an SP portraying a parent of a child with speech delay. The Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) was developed to assess students' foundation clinical competencies of communication, interviewing and professional practice skills. Students' interviews were videotaped, rated individually on the SPIRS by the clinical educator, and later re-rated by an expert rater. Data were analysed to determine the content validity, internal consistency, and inter-rater reliability of the tool. In addition, descriptive statistics were used to report student performance levels. Results indicated that the SPIRS had good content validity and internal consistency but that there may be some redundancy in individual items. An acceptable level of inter-rater reliability was achieved. Students generally scored highly, with non-verbal communication being the easiest and professional practice the most difficult skill to demonstrate. The SPIRS was found to be an appropriate tool for formative assessment of students in this simulated clinic module. Recommendations for improving its reliability were made. Further research is required to investigate use of the SPIRS as an assessment tool in other contexts utilising standardised patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some recommend exploring assessment that does not rely on scales at all. 20 As one author put it, the implication is that measurement of the student alone is only half of the equation. 23 The key point is that relying on behavioural assessment might lead to passing students with "professional behaviours" but unethical attitudes and fail students with "unprofessional behaviours" but ethical attitudes.…”

Section: Professionalism As An Interpersonal Process or Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 They wrote that: "Future efforts at evaluation need to look beyond the behaviors, and should incorporate the reasoning and motivations behind students' actions in challenging professional situations…sophisticated evaluation of professionalism requires an additional dimension, as behaviors alone do not give us all of the information we need to make accurate judgments." 19,20 Others have argued that there are definable stages that individuals pass through on the way from "proto" professionalism to full professionalism in relation to learning environments. Evaluation involves the documentation of attainment (or attrition) of these characteristics.…”

Section: Professionalism As An Interpersonal Process or Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of professionalism: Recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past twenty-five years, professionalism has emerged as a substantive and sustained theme, the operationalization and measurement of which, has become a major concern for those involved in medical education. However, how to go about establishing the elements that constitute appropriate professionalism in order to assess them is difficult. Using a discourse analysis approach, the International Ottawa Conference Working Group on Professionalism (IOCPWG) studied some of the dominant notions of professionalism, and in particular the implications for its assessment. The results presented here reveal different ways of thinking about professionalism that can lead toward a multi-dimensional, multi-paradigmatic approach to assessing professionalism at different levels: individual, inter-personal, societal-institutional. Recommendations for research about professionalism assessment are also presented.

show abstract

“…These included giving greater attention to the theoretical knowledge base of professionalism and its application to a clinical environment, exemplified by a strategy of presenting students with a professional dilemma or challenging situation, and assessing the reasoning behind their actions and decisions (Ginsburg et al 2009). The teaching strategies generated in our faculty workshop mimic this approach, with the additional benefit of trigger scenarios being derived from the students' own experiences in the clinic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Professionalism: A Theoretical Framework for Defining Clinical Rotation Assessment Criteria

Armitage‐Chan¹

2016

Journal of Veterinary Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although widely accepted as an important graduate competence, professionalism is a challenging outcome to define and assess. Clinical rotations provide an excellent opportunity to develop student professionalism through the use of experiential learning and effective feedback, but without appropriate theoretical frameworks, clinical teachers may find it difficult to identify appropriate learning outcomes. The adage "I know it when I see it" is unhelpful in providing feedback and guidance for student improvement, and criteria that are more specifically defined would help students direct their own development. This study sought first to identify how clinical faculty in one institution currently assess professionalism, using retrospective analysis of material obtained in undergraduate teaching and faculty development sessions. Subsequently, a faculty workshop was held in which a round-table type discussion sought to develop these ideas and identify how professionalism assessment could be improved. The output of this session was a theoretical framework for teaching and assessing professionalism, providing example assessment criteria and ideas for clinical teaching. This includes categories such as client and colleague interaction, respect and trust, recognition of limitations, and understanding different professional identities. Each category includes detailed descriptions of the knowledge, skills, and behaviors expected of students in these areas. The criteria were determined by engaging faculty in the development of the framework, and therefore they should represent a focused development of criteria already used to assess professionalism, and not a novel and unfamiliar set of assessment guidelines. This framework is expected to facilitate implementation in clinical teaching.

show abstract

From behaviours to attributions: further concerns regarding the evaluation of professionalism

Cited by 53 publications

References 16 publications

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

An Investigation of the Standardised Patient Interview Rating Scale (SPIRS) for the Assessment of Speech Pathology Students in a Simulation Clinic

Assessment of professionalism: Recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference

Assessing Professionalism: A Theoretical Framework for Defining Clinical Rotation Assessment Criteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About