Dental/medical education is a field which is continually evolving. Over the past few decades, the focus has shifted from summative assessment towards methods of formative assessment. This change will meet the needs of the dental/medical profession in the long-term to produce more reflective clinicians and, in turn, lifelong learners.1–4
The three main methods of assessment are self-, peer- and tutor-assessment. The ideal of producing lifelong, reflective learners appears simple in theory, though in practice the self-reflection necessary to drive an adult towards the learning needed to improve their skills may not be so straightforward.
Some studies have shown that most professionals are not good at assessing themselves; however, these reviews determined that the ability to self-assess is key in becoming, and remaining, a successful professional in the dental/medical field.2,5−10 On the other hand, peer-assessment appears to hold more weight in terms of validity and is usually in line with tutor ratings.5,6,11−17
Tutor-assessment, both summative and formative, is the conventional method of assessment.
Pre-clinical skills laboratory course component forms an essential part of the Bachelor of Science in Oral Health Science (BSc OHS) degree at most universities within the United Kingdom. Currently, within Edinburgh, tutor-assessment of the pre-clinical session is utilised, although no self- or peer-assessments are included in this component.
The comparison between modes of assessment has been a topic of research over the past few decades. In the field of dentistry, specifically in the area of pre-clinical skills, there is limited research which compares the different assessment outcomes. A study in 2001, found that the methods of self- and peer-assessment are under-utilised in the clinical training of dentists in the restorative field.18 With the drive for self-directed learning in full swing, it is important not only to impress these methods of assessment onto clinical programmes in dentistry, but also to ensure their proper execution and effective utilisation.
Another study compared the self-, peer- and tutor- assessments in relation to a clinical procedure and found, in line with most research, that self-assessment had poor correlation with tutor scores. Peer-assessment scores, however, were consistent with tutor scores. They utilised checklists and global scoring which appears to give more reliable results in most studies.15
In 2015 a study undertaken in Dundee compared the assessment outcomes of self-, peer- and tutor- assessment in a pre-clinical laboratory setting. This study found that students needed more training to enhance both their self- and peer-assessment skills, as there was poor correlation between the three assessment types, with students over-estimating their own, as well as their peers, performance in comparison to the tutor’s evaluation.19 This outcome would suggest that students need more training in assessment, or that they do not hold the level of expertise required to measure and evaluate to a satisfactory level.
This project aims to encourage the incorporation of self- and peer-assessment into the pre-clinical curriculum as an adjunct to the conventional tutor-assessment in the pre-clinical laboratory component of the BSc OHS course.