Acceptance Declaration
Accept
Additional Information
I declare I have no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this program.
Accepted Type
Oral
Category
General Call (Workshop, Oral Presentation, Poster Presentation)
Type
Oral
Sub Type
Education Research
Will the presenter be a:
Student
Affiliation
Considered for Poster
yes
Title
Validation of a grid to document the quality of structured reflection when implemented as a learning strategy at the UGME level
Length of Presentation
Background/Purpose
We implemented a learning activity at the UGME level that requires students to complete a structured reflection (SR) grid, while solving problems with the purpose to help them develop their diagnostic reasoning. While SR has been studied in experimental settings, no tool exists to document how students use it when implemented in a curriculum. Thus, we created and proceeded to the validation of a tool to document the quality of students' SR.
Methods
Informed by the Unified Theory of Validity, we documented evidences of content (narrative description of development), internal structure (rater agreement using intra-class correlations; item analysis and internal consistency), and response processes (descriptive statistics). The analyses were done on 3 datasets (27 and 15-SR scored by 2 raters; 90-SR scored by 1 rater).
Results
The tool to document the quality of SR is comprised of four indicators: 1) Diagnostic hypothesis (dx): a) relevance and b) specificity; 2) Elements supporting dx, 3) Elements against dx:, 4) Elements expected but not present in the case: a) relevance and b) elaboration. ICCs on the 27- and 15- double-scored SR were: .82 (1st indicator), .80 (2nd), .89 (3rd), and .88 (4th), and .76, .75, .78, and, .84 respectively. Cronbach's alpha was .795 for the 90 individually scored RS. Item difficulty coefficients ranged from .04 to .94, while discrimination coefficients ranged from .031 to .489. Descriptive analyses showed that students used the SR grid to compare and contrast dx.
Conclusion
We created a tool to describe students' SR. Our findings suggest that the tool can be standardized and thus can provide data for research purposes or to give feedback to trainees and/or program administrators.
Keyword 1
Validation
Keyword 2
Assessment tool
Keyword 3
Structured reflection
Level of Training
Undergraduate
Abstract Themes
Teaching and learning
Additional Theme (First choice)
Additional Theme (Second Choice)
Additional Theme (Third Choice)
Authors
Presenter
Élise Vachon Lachiver
Term 1
Yes
Term 2
Yes
Term 3
Yes
Term 4
Yes
Term 5
Yes
