Learning through multiple lenses: analysis of self, peer, near-peer and faculty assessment of a clinical history taking task in Australia

Abstract

PURPOSE: Peer assessment may offer a framework for expected skill development and feedback appropriate to the learner level. Near-peer (NP) assessment may elevate expectations and motivate student learning. Feedback from peers and NPs may offer a sustainable approach to enhancing student assessment feedback. The aim was to analyze the relationship and attitudes of self, peer, NP and faculty marking of an assessment. METHODS: A cross sectional study design was used. Year 2 osteopathy students (n = 86) were invited to self and peer assess a clinical history-taking and communication skills assessment. Near-peers and faculty also marked the assessment. Year 2 students also completed a peer/NP attitudes questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and Spearman's rho were used to evaluate the relationships across marker groups. RESULTS: Year 2 students (n=9), near-peers (n=3) and faculty (n=5) were recruited. Correlations between self and peer (r=0.38) and self and faculty (r = 0.43) marks were moderate. A weak correlation was observed between self and near-peer marks (r = 0.25). Perceptions of peer and near-peer marking were varied with over half of the cohort suggesting peer or NP assessments marks should not contribute to a grade. CONCLUSION: Framing peer and NP assessment as another feedback source may offer a sustainable method for enhancing feedback without overloading faculty resources. Multiple sources of feedback may assist in developing assessment literacy and calibrate a students' self-assessment capability. The small number of students recruited may indicate some acceptability of peer and NP assessment however further work is required to increase its acceptability.