The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale.

H. K. Meetz, M. J. Bebeau, S. J. Thoma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Rating scales are standard tools for evaluating clinical performance in medicine; however, in dentistry they appear to be used solely to evaluate technical skills. A pretest of three performance scales did not reveal the superiority of any one scale, though faculty clearly preferred a 20-item, six-point Likert scale that rated personal, interpersonal, and professional qualities. Directors and co-directors of six group clinics subsequently rated performance of two classes of seniors and one class of juniors. Interrater reliabilities, ranging from .62 to .83 across rater pairs, were superior to reliabilities reported in medical education studies. Although technique grades, preclinical GPA, and performance ratings differentiated students who completed clinical requirements on time (n = 302) from those who did not (n = 83), performance ratings added information about competence that was not reflected in GPA and technique grades. The usefulness of a rating scale appears to be in its potential for giving students feedback and for evaluating program effectiveness.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)290-297
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Dental Education
Volume52
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 1 1988

Fingerprint

rating scale
Reproducibility of Results
Students
Program Evaluation
Medical Education
Dentistry
Mental Competency
performance
Medicine
director
rating
dentistry
student
medicine
education
Group

Cite this

Meetz, H. K., Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1988). The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale. Journal of Dental Education, 52(6), 290-297.

The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale. / Meetz, H. K.; Bebeau, M. J.; Thoma, S. J.

In: Journal of Dental Education, Vol. 52, No. 6, 01.06.1988, p. 290-297.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Meetz, HK, Bebeau, MJ & Thoma, SJ 1988, 'The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale.', Journal of Dental Education, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 290-297.
Meetz, H. K. ; Bebeau, M. J. ; Thoma, S. J. / The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale. In: Journal of Dental Education. 1988 ; Vol. 52, No. 6. pp. 290-297.
@article{b45bb832de8049f6aee9b6d6c61dd22c,
title = "The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale.",
abstract = "Rating scales are standard tools for evaluating clinical performance in medicine; however, in dentistry they appear to be used solely to evaluate technical skills. A pretest of three performance scales did not reveal the superiority of any one scale, though faculty clearly preferred a 20-item, six-point Likert scale that rated personal, interpersonal, and professional qualities. Directors and co-directors of six group clinics subsequently rated performance of two classes of seniors and one class of juniors. Interrater reliabilities, ranging from .62 to .83 across rater pairs, were superior to reliabilities reported in medical education studies. Although technique grades, preclinical GPA, and performance ratings differentiated students who completed clinical requirements on time (n = 302) from those who did not (n = 83), performance ratings added information about competence that was not reflected in GPA and technique grades. The usefulness of a rating scale appears to be in its potential for giving students feedback and for evaluating program effectiveness.",
author = "Meetz, {H. K.} and Bebeau, {M. J.} and Thoma, {S. J.}",
year = "1988",
month = "6",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "52",
pages = "290--297",
journal = "Journal of Dental Education",
issn = "0022-0337",
publisher = "American Dental Education Association",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The validity and reliability of a clinical performance rating scale.

AU - Meetz, H. K.

AU - Bebeau, M. J.

AU - Thoma, S. J.

PY - 1988/6/1

Y1 - 1988/6/1

N2 - Rating scales are standard tools for evaluating clinical performance in medicine; however, in dentistry they appear to be used solely to evaluate technical skills. A pretest of three performance scales did not reveal the superiority of any one scale, though faculty clearly preferred a 20-item, six-point Likert scale that rated personal, interpersonal, and professional qualities. Directors and co-directors of six group clinics subsequently rated performance of two classes of seniors and one class of juniors. Interrater reliabilities, ranging from .62 to .83 across rater pairs, were superior to reliabilities reported in medical education studies. Although technique grades, preclinical GPA, and performance ratings differentiated students who completed clinical requirements on time (n = 302) from those who did not (n = 83), performance ratings added information about competence that was not reflected in GPA and technique grades. The usefulness of a rating scale appears to be in its potential for giving students feedback and for evaluating program effectiveness.

AB - Rating scales are standard tools for evaluating clinical performance in medicine; however, in dentistry they appear to be used solely to evaluate technical skills. A pretest of three performance scales did not reveal the superiority of any one scale, though faculty clearly preferred a 20-item, six-point Likert scale that rated personal, interpersonal, and professional qualities. Directors and co-directors of six group clinics subsequently rated performance of two classes of seniors and one class of juniors. Interrater reliabilities, ranging from .62 to .83 across rater pairs, were superior to reliabilities reported in medical education studies. Although technique grades, preclinical GPA, and performance ratings differentiated students who completed clinical requirements on time (n = 302) from those who did not (n = 83), performance ratings added information about competence that was not reflected in GPA and technique grades. The usefulness of a rating scale appears to be in its potential for giving students feedback and for evaluating program effectiveness.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024021249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024021249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 52

SP - 290

EP - 297

JO - Journal of Dental Education

JF - Journal of Dental Education

SN - 0022-0337

IS - 6

ER -