Workplace formative assessment: Faculty members' beliefs

Joslyn Sciacca Kirby, Loren Archibeque, Lindsay Confer, David Baird

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Workplace-based formative assessment (WFA) is an increasingly used tool in graduate medical education as it serves to evaluate and teach; however, the use of WFA is reportedly low. The objectives of this study were to assess the proportion of dermatology residency training programmes using WFA, and to describe faculty members' beliefs about the factors that support or impede its use. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to all US dermatology programmes. Results: Responses were collected from 43 per cent (56/131) of the US dermatology programmes. Half (28/56) of the respondent programmes use WFA. The most frequently endorsed advantage was 'provides feedback to residents about their performance'. The most frequent barriers were 'time for faculty to observe' and 'faculty interest'. Discussion: WFA has been shown to stimulate learning through the exchange of feedback with a learner about gaps in his or her practice. This study showed that WFA is not yet used in the majority of dermatology training programmes. Time for faculty members to perform WFA was the most cited barrier to the use of WFA, but few studies have investigated the actual time requirement. Secondly, faculty members' interest may be encouraged through training and an increased awareness of the impact of WFA. For example, the evidence supporting the effects of feedback include a meta-analysis of over 1800 studies showed that the effect of feedback, especially regarding performance on a specific task, was greater than the effect of schooling.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)33-37
Number of pages5
JournalClinical Teacher
Volume13
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2016

Fingerprint

Workplace
Dermatology
Graduate Medical Education
Education
Internship and Residency
Meta-Analysis
Learning

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)
  • Review and Exam Preparation

Cite this

Sciacca Kirby, Joslyn ; Archibeque, Loren ; Confer, Lindsay ; Baird, David. / Workplace formative assessment : Faculty members' beliefs. In: Clinical Teacher. 2016 ; Vol. 13, No. 1. pp. 33-37.
@article{2f32013a89ab4619b9b07c1fe105ca73,
title = "Workplace formative assessment: Faculty members' beliefs",
abstract = "Background: Workplace-based formative assessment (WFA) is an increasingly used tool in graduate medical education as it serves to evaluate and teach; however, the use of WFA is reportedly low. The objectives of this study were to assess the proportion of dermatology residency training programmes using WFA, and to describe faculty members' beliefs about the factors that support or impede its use. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to all US dermatology programmes. Results: Responses were collected from 43 per cent (56/131) of the US dermatology programmes. Half (28/56) of the respondent programmes use WFA. The most frequently endorsed advantage was 'provides feedback to residents about their performance'. The most frequent barriers were 'time for faculty to observe' and 'faculty interest'. Discussion: WFA has been shown to stimulate learning through the exchange of feedback with a learner about gaps in his or her practice. This study showed that WFA is not yet used in the majority of dermatology training programmes. Time for faculty members to perform WFA was the most cited barrier to the use of WFA, but few studies have investigated the actual time requirement. Secondly, faculty members' interest may be encouraged through training and an increased awareness of the impact of WFA. For example, the evidence supporting the effects of feedback include a meta-analysis of over 1800 studies showed that the effect of feedback, especially regarding performance on a specific task, was greater than the effect of schooling.",
author = "{Sciacca Kirby}, Joslyn and Loren Archibeque and Lindsay Confer and David Baird",
year = "2016",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/tct.12348",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "33--37",
journal = "Clinical Teacher",
issn = "1743-4971",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

Workplace formative assessment : Faculty members' beliefs. / Sciacca Kirby, Joslyn; Archibeque, Loren; Confer, Lindsay; Baird, David.

In: Clinical Teacher, Vol. 13, No. 1, 01.02.2016, p. 33-37.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Workplace formative assessment

T2 - Faculty members' beliefs

AU - Sciacca Kirby, Joslyn

AU - Archibeque, Loren

AU - Confer, Lindsay

AU - Baird, David

PY - 2016/2/1

Y1 - 2016/2/1

N2 - Background: Workplace-based formative assessment (WFA) is an increasingly used tool in graduate medical education as it serves to evaluate and teach; however, the use of WFA is reportedly low. The objectives of this study were to assess the proportion of dermatology residency training programmes using WFA, and to describe faculty members' beliefs about the factors that support or impede its use. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to all US dermatology programmes. Results: Responses were collected from 43 per cent (56/131) of the US dermatology programmes. Half (28/56) of the respondent programmes use WFA. The most frequently endorsed advantage was 'provides feedback to residents about their performance'. The most frequent barriers were 'time for faculty to observe' and 'faculty interest'. Discussion: WFA has been shown to stimulate learning through the exchange of feedback with a learner about gaps in his or her practice. This study showed that WFA is not yet used in the majority of dermatology training programmes. Time for faculty members to perform WFA was the most cited barrier to the use of WFA, but few studies have investigated the actual time requirement. Secondly, faculty members' interest may be encouraged through training and an increased awareness of the impact of WFA. For example, the evidence supporting the effects of feedback include a meta-analysis of over 1800 studies showed that the effect of feedback, especially regarding performance on a specific task, was greater than the effect of schooling.

AB - Background: Workplace-based formative assessment (WFA) is an increasingly used tool in graduate medical education as it serves to evaluate and teach; however, the use of WFA is reportedly low. The objectives of this study were to assess the proportion of dermatology residency training programmes using WFA, and to describe faculty members' beliefs about the factors that support or impede its use. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to all US dermatology programmes. Results: Responses were collected from 43 per cent (56/131) of the US dermatology programmes. Half (28/56) of the respondent programmes use WFA. The most frequently endorsed advantage was 'provides feedback to residents about their performance'. The most frequent barriers were 'time for faculty to observe' and 'faculty interest'. Discussion: WFA has been shown to stimulate learning through the exchange of feedback with a learner about gaps in his or her practice. This study showed that WFA is not yet used in the majority of dermatology training programmes. Time for faculty members to perform WFA was the most cited barrier to the use of WFA, but few studies have investigated the actual time requirement. Secondly, faculty members' interest may be encouraged through training and an increased awareness of the impact of WFA. For example, the evidence supporting the effects of feedback include a meta-analysis of over 1800 studies showed that the effect of feedback, especially regarding performance on a specific task, was greater than the effect of schooling.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84956756367&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84956756367&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/tct.12348

DO - 10.1111/tct.12348

M3 - Article

C2 - 25962905

AN - SCOPUS:84956756367

VL - 13

SP - 33

EP - 37

JO - Clinical Teacher

JF - Clinical Teacher

SN - 1743-4971

IS - 1

ER -