Self-assessment and Teacher-Assessment During an OSCE in Undergraduate Dental Students-Application of a Visual Metaphor
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Reflection on both student and teacher perspectives is crucial for effective communication and professional relationships during education. Objectives: This observational cohort study aimed to compare students' self-assessment with teacher assessments, as well as with estimated self-assessment and estimated teacher-assessment, using the pictorial representation of illness and self-measure (PRISM) during an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Additionally, it sought to compare self-assessment and teacher-assessment with OSCE scores. Methods: Fourth-year dental students (n = 44) were included at the beginning of their clinical course. Three tasks were selected for the OSCE exams: Oral examination on a model (task 1), matrix placement (task 2), and endodontic radiograph evaluation (task 3). Objective structured clinical examination scores were rated by an independent rater. Students and one of three calibrated teachers used PRISM to evaluate their respective assessments independently and blinded from each other. The relationships between the different assessments were determined using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Results: For task 1, a moderate correlation was found between students' self-assessment and estimated self-assessment (r = 0.44, P < 0.01). For task 2, moderate correlations were observed between self-assessment and teacher-assessment, estimated teacher-assessment and teacher-assessment, as well as between self-assessment and estimated self-assessment (P ≤ 0.01). For task 3, moderate correlations were found between self-assessment and teacher-assessment, and between self-assessment and estimated self-assessment (P < 0.01). A moderate negative correlation between self-assessment and the OSCE score was observed only for task 2 (r = -0.41, P = 0.01). Moderate negative correlations between teacher-assessment in PRISM and the OSCE score were found for all three tasks (P < 0.01). Conclusions: Self-assessment and teacher-assessment using PRISM exhibited task-dependent correlations, while results for estimated assessments varied. PRISM may serve as a promising tool for feedback and discussion in the future, as it seems capable of highlighting different views and expectations in the teaching context. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».