Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Structured Peer Assessment Method with Regular Reinforcement Promotes Longitudinal Self-Perceived Development of Medical Students’ Feedback Skills

  • Original research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Given that training is integral to providing constructive peer feedback, we examined the impact of a regularly reinforced, structured peer assessment method on student-reported feedback abilities throughout a two-year preclinical Communication Skills course.

Methods

Three consecutive 32-student medical school classes were introduced to the Observation-Reaction-Feedback method for providing verbal assessment during Year 1 Communication Skills orientation. In biweekly small-group sessions, students received worksheets reiterating the method and practiced giving verbal feedback to peers. Periodic questionnaires evaluated student perceptions of feedback delivery and the Observation-Reaction-Feedback method.

Results

Biweekly reinforcement of the Observation-Reaction-Feedback method encouraged its uptake, which correlated with reports of more constructive, specific feedback. Compared to non-users, students who used the method noted greater improvement in comfort with assessing peers in Year 1 and continued growth of feedback abilities in Year 2. Comfort with providing modifying feedback and verbal feedback increased over the two-year course, while comfort with providing reinforcing feedback and written feedback remained similarly high. Concurrently, student preference for feedback anonymity decreased.

Conclusions

Regular reinforcement of a peer assessment framework can increase student usage of the method, which promotes the expansion of self-reported peer feedback skills over time. These findings support investigation of analogous strategies in other medical education settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Due to the IRB-exempt nature of this research, participants of this study did not agree for their data to be shared publicly, so supporting data are not available.

References

  1. Dannefer EF, Prayson RA. Supporting students in self-regulation: Use of formative feedback and portfolios in a problem-based learning setting. Med Teach. 2013;35(8):655–60. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2013.785630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lerchenfeldt S, Mi M, Eng M. The utilization of peer feedback during collaborative learning in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19(1):321. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1755-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Burt J, Abel G, Elliott MN, Elmore N, Newbould J, Davey A, et al. The Evaluation of Physicians’ Communication Skills From Multiple Perspectives. Ann Fam Med. 2018;16(4):330–7. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hulsman RL, Peters JF, Fabriek M. Peer-assessment of medical communication skills: the impact of students’ personality, academic and social reputation on behavioural assessment. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;92(3):346–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.07.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cushing A, Abbott S, Lothian D, Hall A, Westwood OMR. Peer feedback as an aid to learning – What do we want? Feedback. When do we want it? Now! Med Teach. 2011;33(2):e105-e12. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2011.542522.

  6. Burgess AW, Roberts C, Black KI, Mellis C. Senior medical student perceived ability and experience in giving peer feedback in formative long case examinations. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):79. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ludwig AB, Raff AC, Lin J, Schoenbaum E. Group observed structured encounter (GOSCE) for third-year medical students improves self-assessment of clinical communication. Med Teach. 2017;39(9):931–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2017.1332361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Li H, Xiong Y, Hunter CV, Guo X, Tywoniw R. Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis Assess Eval High Educ. 2020;45(2):193–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Perera J, Mohamadou G, Kaur S. The use of objective structured self-assessment and peer-feedback (OSSP) for learning communication skills: evaluation using a controlled trial. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2010;15(2):185–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-009-9191-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cantillon P, Sargeant J. Giving feedback in clinical settings. BMJ. 2008;337:a1961. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Finn GM, Garner J. Twelve tips for implementing a successful peer assessment. Med Teach. 2011;33(6):443–6. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2010.546909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pendleton D. The Consultation: An Approach to Learning and Teaching. vol 6. Oxford University Press; 1984.

  13. Vickery AW, Lake FR. Teaching on the run tips 10: giving feedback. Med J Aust. 2005;183(5):267–8. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb07035.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dannefer EF, Henson LC. The portfolio approach to competency-based assessment at the Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine. Acad Med. 2007;82(5).

  15. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rudy DW, Fejfar MC, Griffith CH, Wilson JF. Self- and peer assessment in a first-year communication and interviewing course. Eval Health Prof. 2001;24(4):436–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/016327870102400405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chou CL, Masters DE, Chang A, Kruidering M, Hauer KE. Effects of longitudinal small-group learning on delivery and receipt of communication skills feedback. Med Educ. 2013;47(11):1073–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Arnold L, Shue CK, Kritt B, Ginsburg S, Stern DT. Medical students’ views on peer assessment of professionalism. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(9):819–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0162.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M. Peer assessment in problem-based learning: a qualitative study. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2007;12(2):169–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-005-5046-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Dr. Beth Bierer for her thoughtful comments on a previous draft of this manuscript. They also thank Josephine Volovetz, Catherine Ituarte, Kelly Shibuya, Blair Mitchell-Handley, and Brian Schroer for assistance in developing and implementing ORF.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Bethany Bruno, Jessica Cooperrider, Perry B. Dinardo contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Alice Tzeng, Bethany Bruno, Jessica Cooperrider, Perry B. Dinardo, Rachael Baird, Carol Swetlik, Brittany N. Goldstein, Radhika Rastogi, Alicia J. Roth, Timothy D. Gilligan & Julie M. Rish

  2. Center for Behavioral Health, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Julie M. Rish

  3. Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Timothy D. Gilligan

  4. Office of Patient Experience, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Julie M. Rish

  5. Women’s Health Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Rachael Baird

  6. Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Carol Swetlik

  7. Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Brittany N. Goldstein

  8. Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, PA, USA

    Radhika Rastogi

  9. Sleep Disorders Center, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Alicia J. Roth

Authors
  1. Alice Tzeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bethany Bruno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jessica Cooperrider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Perry B. Dinardo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rachael Baird
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Carol Swetlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Brittany N. Goldstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Radhika Rastogi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Alicia J. Roth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Timothy D. Gilligan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Julie M. Rish
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Alice Tzeng, Bethany Bruno, Jessica Cooperrider, Perry B. Dinardo, Rachael Baird, Carol Swetlik, Brittany N. Goldstein, and Radhika Rastogi. Data analyses and initial manuscript drafting were performed by Alice Tzeng, Bethany Bruno, Jessica Cooperrider, and Perry B. Dinardo. All authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript, and read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alice Tzeng.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The project was categorized as quality improvement by the Cleveland Clinic Institutional Review Board and thus was granted an exemption. All work was conducted in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration.

Conflicts of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 15748 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tzeng, A., Bruno, B., Cooperrider, J. et al. A Structured Peer Assessment Method with Regular Reinforcement Promotes Longitudinal Self-Perceived Development of Medical Students’ Feedback Skills. Med.Sci.Educ. 31, 655–663 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01242-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-021-01242-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation