Comparison of two veterinary emergency and critical care clerkship grading protocols

Abstract

Universal guidelines for evaluating veterinary students' clinical clerkship performance are unavailable. At our institution, each service determines its own grading protocol. In this study, researchers compared clinician, staff, and student perceptions of a traditional and newly devised grading practice on the Emergency and Critical Care (ECC) clerkship. ECC clinicians and technicians were asked to assess the existing grading protocol for the clerkship. The system was then revised to better align with clerkship objectives. The revised protocol evaluated students on 12 items encompassing knowledge, clinical, and communication skills. Following the assignment of values for each category, letter grades were calculated automatically. Clinicians and staff were invited to rate the revised grading system. Throughout the study period, a corresponding survey was sent to students shortly after they had received their clerkship grades. Students' open-ended comments were analyzed qualitatively to identify common themes. Clinicians and technicians reported that the revised protocol was more inclusive and better able to provide fair and accurate assessments of students' performances. Students were generally satisfied with both grading protocols, however, in the open-ended comments students' frequently expressed desire for more directed and timely feedback on their performance. The results of this study indicate that the graders' believed that the revised evaluation protocol provides opportunities to provide fair and accurate assessments of student performance. Overall, students were satisfied with the new protocol and have a desire for tailored feedback provided in a timely fashion.