Variability of residents’ ratings of faculty’s teaching performance measured by five- and seven-point response scales

BMC Medical Education

Maarten P. M. Debets¹  Benjamin C. M. Boerebach¹  Kiki M. J. M. H. Lombarts¹  Onyebuchi A. Arah²  Renée A. Scheepers³ 

[1] Amsterdam Center for Professional Performance and Compassionate Care, Department of Medical Psychology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22700, Meibergdreef 9, 1100, Amsterdam, DE, The Netherlands;Department of Epidemiology, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California, USA;UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, Los Angeles, California, USA;Center for Social Statistics, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA;Department of Statistics, UCLA, Los Angeles, California, USA;Research group Socio-Medical Sciences, Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands;

关键词: Teaching performance;    Performance ratings;    Response categories;    Residents;    Faculty;    Five-point scale;    Seven-point scale;    Variability;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-020-02244-9

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundMedical faculty’s teaching performance is often measured using residents’ feedback, collected by questionnaires. Researchers extensively studied the psychometric qualities of resulting ratings. However, these studies rarely consider the number of response categories and its consequences for residents’ ratings of faculty’s teaching performance. We compared the variability of residents’ ratings measured by five- and seven-point response scales.MethodsThis retrospective study used teaching performance data from Dutch anaesthesiology residency training programs. Questionnaires with five- and seven-point response scales from the extensively studied System for Evaluation of Teaching Qualities (SETQ) collected the ratings. We inspected ratings’ variability by comparing standard deviations, interquartile ranges, and frequency (percentage) distributions. Relevant statistical tests were used to test differences in frequency distributions and teaching performance scores.ResultsWe examined 3379 residents’ ratings and 480 aggregated faculty scores. Residents used the additional response categories provided by the seven-point scale – especially those differentiating between positive performances. Residents’ ratings and aggregated faculty scores showed a more even distribution on the seven-point scale compared to the five-point scale. Also, the seven-point scale showed a smaller ceiling effect. After rescaling, the mean scores and (most) standard deviations of ratings from both scales were comparable.ConclusionsRatings from the seven-point scale were more evenly distributed and could potentially yield more nuanced, specific and user-friendly feedback. Still, both scales measured (almost) similar teaching performance outcomes. In teaching performance practice, residents and faculty members should discuss whether response scales fit their preferences and goals.

【 授权许可】

CC BY