Validity and reliability assessment of a peer evaluation method in team-based learning classes.
- Author:
Hyun Bae YOON
1
;
Wan Beom PARK
;
Sun Jung MYUNG
;
Sang Hui MOON
;
Jun Bean PARK
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Peer evaluation; Reliability; Validity; Team-based learning
- MeSH: Education, Medical; Humans; Learning*; Methods*; Reproducibility of Results*; Schools, Medical; Social Responsibility
- From:Korean Journal of Medical Education 2018;30(1):23-29
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Team-based learning (TBL) is increasingly employed in medical education because of its potential to promote active group learning. In TBL, learners are usually asked to assess the contributions of peers within their group to ensure accountability. The purpose of this study is to assess the validity and reliability of a peer evaluation instrument that was used in TBL classes in a single medical school. METHODS: A total of 141 students were divided into 18 groups in 11 TBL classes. The students were asked to evaluate their peers in the group based on evaluation criteria that were provided to them. We analyzed the comments that were written for the highest and lowest achievers to assess the validity of the peer evaluation instrument. The reliability of the instrument was assessed by examining the agreement among peer ratings within each group of students via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis. RESULTS: Most of the students provided reasonable and understandable comments for the high and low achievers within their group, and most of those comments were compatible with the evaluation criteria. The average ICC of each group ranged from 0.390 to 0.863, and the overall average was 0.659. There was no significant difference in inter-rater reliability according to the number of members in the group or the timing of the evaluation within the course. CONCLUSION: The peer evaluation instrument that was used in the TBL classes was valid and reliable. Providing evaluation criteria and rules seemed to improve the validity and reliability of the instrument.
