Comparing Paper-based and Mobile Application for Rank-based Peer Assessment in Interprofessional Education: Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic

Overview

Journal BMC Med Educ

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Medical Education

Date 2024 Nov 28

PMID 39604964

Authors

Doni Widyandana

Prattama Santoso Utomo

Ide Pustaka Setiawan

Yustina Tyas Kurniawati

Sucheta Dandekar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Education was affected during the COVID-19 pandemic, and there was a need to adapt the learning approaches to the situation. At the University of Gadjah Mada, many essential soft skills of healthcare professionals are taught using the interprofessional education (IPE) approach on-site. Our university responded to this crisis by offering online classes and similar types of training. Post-administration of the course, a peer-assessment was conducted, and it was used to provide feedback on the work or performance of peers among students. Peer assessment was done using paper-based and a mobile application during COVID-19. This study aimed to share a best practice for the implementation of a rank-based peer-assessment application for longitudinal interprofessional education in the community setting and to compare the score distribution of a rank-based peer-assessment before and after using mobile application.

Methods: Quantitative research design was used by processing secondary data on student peer assessment scores from 3 bachelor programs (medicine, nursing, nutritionist) Community and Family Health Care with Interprofessional Education (CFHC-IPE) in Faculty of Medicine, Nursing, and Public Health, Universitas Gadjah Mada. 4,790 students from 2018 to 2022 (5 years) were tracked before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessments carried out were offline, online, and blended learning, respectively. The assessment was carried out using a paper-based method before and during the pandemic, online-based with a mobile application was used. Thus, the peer-assessment was conducted manually or using paper-based method using a 5-rank scoring system. In 2019, the peer assessment was carried out using a mobile application and applied a 10-rank scoring system.

Results: The rank-based peer assessment can be well implemented to make students assess their friends more objectively, with an average score 82.02 ± 8.68. The rightward shift in the distribution of scores indicates that the average score has improved after using the mobile application compared to before its use. (82.02 ± 8.68 vs. 62.39 ± 11.13, p < 0.05).

Conclusion: The implementation of rank-based peer-assessment using a mobile application was well received during and after the pandemic by interprofessional undergraduate students. The online system made the assessment more objective and the average grades were seen to be better.

References

Guraya S, van Mook W, Khoshhal K . Failure of faculty to fail failing medical students: Fiction or an actual erosion of professional standards?. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2019; 14(2):103-109. PMC: 6694968. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtumed.2019.01.001. View

OLeary N, Salmon N, Clifford A . 'It benefits patient care': the value of practice-based IPE in healthcare curriculums. BMC Med Educ. 2020; 20(1):424. PMC: 7658912. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02356-2. View

van Diggele C, Burgess A, Mellis C . Planning, preparing and structuring a small group teaching session. BMC Med Educ. 2020; 20(Suppl 2):462. PMC: 7712596. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-020-02281-4. View

Aldriwesh M, Alyousif S, Alharbi N . Undergraduate-level teaching and learning approaches for interprofessional education in the health professions: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ. 2022; 22(1):13. PMC: 8725543. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-021-03073-0. View

ODoherty D, Dromey M, Lougheed J, Hannigan A, Last J, McGrath D . Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education - an integrative review. BMC Med Educ. 2018; 18(1):130. PMC: 5992716. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-018-1240-0. View

Bates J, Schrewe B, Ellaway R, Teunissen P, Watling C . Embracing standardisation and contextualisation in medical education. Med Educ. 2018; 53(1):15-24. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13740. View

Rastogi A, Bansal A, Keshan P, Jindal A, Prakash A, Kumar V . Medical education in post-pandemic times: Online or offline mode of learning?. J Family Med Prim Care. 2022; 11(9):5375-5386. PMC: 9731027. DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_2305_21. View

Curran V, Sharpe D, Forristall J, Flynn K . Student satisfaction and perceptions of small group process in case-based interprofessional learning. Med Teach. 2008; 30(4):431-3. DOI: 10.1080/01421590802047323. View

Finn G, Garner J . Twelve tips for implementing a successful peer assessment. Med Teach. 2011; 33(6):443-6. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2010.546909. View

10.

Biesma R, Kennedy M, Pawlikowska T, Brugha R, Conroy R, Doyle F . Peer assessment to improve medical student's contributions to team-based projects: randomised controlled trial and qualitative follow-up. BMC Med Educ. 2019; 19(1):371. PMC: 6794794. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-019-1783-8. View

11.

Kibble J, Plochocki J . Comparing Machine Learning Models and Human Raters When Ranking Medical Student Performance Evaluations. J Grad Med Educ. 2023; 15(4):488-493. PMC: 10449343. DOI: 10.4300/JGME-D-22-00678.1. View

12.

Ahmady S, Kallestrup P, Sadoughi M, Katibeh M, Kalantarion M, Amini M . Distance learning strategies in medical education during COVID-19: A systematic review. J Educ Health Promot. 2022; 10:421. PMC: 8719547. DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_318_21. View

13.

Grace S . Models of interprofessional education for healthcare students: a scoping review. J Interprof Care. 2020; 35(5):771-783. DOI: 10.1080/13561820.2020.1767045. View

14.

AlQhtani A, AlSwedan N, Almulhim A, Aladwan R, Alessa Y, AlQhtani K . Online versus classroom teaching for medical students during COVID-19: measuring effectiveness and satisfaction. BMC Med Educ. 2021; 21(1):452. PMC: 8397601. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-021-02888-1. View

15.

Utomo P, Datusanantyo R, Hartono J, Permana A, Triharnoto T . Combining an experiential learning model and interprofessional peer-mentoring to improve maternal and neonatal health: Lessons learned from Indonesia. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2023; 35(3):89-95. DOI: 10.4103/efh.EfH_375_20. View

16.

Siddiqui Z, Jonas-Dwyer D, Carr S . Twelve tips for peer observation of teaching. Med Teach. 2007; 29(4):297-300. DOI: 10.1080/01421590701291451. View

17.

Tariq M, Boulet J, Motiwala A, Sajjad N, Ali S . A 360-degree evaluation of the communication and interpersonal skills of medicine resident physicians in Pakistan. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2015; 27(3):269-76. DOI: 10.4103/1357-6283.152188. View

18.

Jebb A, Ng V, Tay L . A Review of Key Likert Scale Development Advances: 1995-2019. Front Psychol. 2021; 12:637547. PMC: 8129175. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.637547. View

19.

Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela V, Burch V, Costa M, Duvivier R . Criteria for good assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach. 2011; 33(3):206-14. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.551559. View

20.

Jang H, Kim K . Use of online clinical videos for clinical skills training for medical students: benefits and challenges. BMC Med Educ. 2014; 14:56. PMC: 3994418. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-56. View