skip to content
Dovepress - Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research
View our mobile site

8852

Reliability of a seminar grading rubric in a grand rounds course

Original Research

(2156) Views  (888) Full article downloads

Authors: Eric J MacLaughlin, David S Fike, Carlos A Alvarez, et al

Published Date September 2010 Volume 2010:3 Pages 169 - 179
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S12346

Eric J MacLaughlin1, David S Fike1, Carlos A Alvarez2, Charles F Seifert3, Amie T Blaszczyk2
Texas Tech University Health Sciences School of Pharmacy, Department of Pharmacy Practice, 1Amarillo, 2Dallas, 3Lubbock, Texas, USA

Purpose: Formal presentations are a common requirement for students in health professional programs, and evaluations are often viewed as subjective. To date, literature describing the reliability or validity of seminar grading rubrics is lacking. The objectives of this study were to characterize inter-rater agreement and internal consistency of a grading rubric used in a grand rounds seminar course.
Methods: Retrospective study of 252 student presentations given from fall 2007 to fall 2008. Data including student and faculty demographics, overall content score, overall communication scores, subcomponents of content and communication, and total presentation scores were collected. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS, 16.0.
Results: The rubric demonstrated internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.826). Mean grade difference between faculty graders was 4.54 percentage points (SD = 3.614), with ≤ 10-point difference for 92.5% of faculty evaluations. Student self evaluations correlated with faculty scores for content, communication, and overall presentation (r = 0.513, r = 0.455, and r = 0.539; P < 0.001 for all respectively). When comparing mean faculty scores to student’s self-evaluations between quintiles, students with lower faculty evaluations overestimated their performance, and those with high faculty evaluations underestimated their performance (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: The seminar evaluation rubric demonstrated inter-rater agreement and internal consistency.

Keywords: seminar, public speaking, evaluation, grand rounds






Readers of this article also read:

Competing interests in development of clinical practice guidelines for diabetes management: Report from a multidisciplinary workshop
Renegotiating roles as part of developing collaborative practice: Australian nurses in general practice and cervical screening
Effectively using communication to enhance the provision of pediatric palliative care in an acute care setting
Effect on work ability after team evaluation of functioning regarding pain, self-rated disability, and work ability assessment
Comparison between the Beck Depression Inventory and psychiatric evaluation of distress in patients on long-term sick leave due to chronic musculoskeletal pain
Health care – an everlasting challenge in temporal and spatial domains
Causal diagrams, information bias, and thought bias
Self-management in heart failure: where have we been and where should we go?
Cumulative clinical experience from over a decade of use of levofloxacin in community-acquired pneumonia: critical appraisal and role in therapy
Nursing around the world: a perspective on growing concerns and the shortage of care
  • Testimonials

    "You do a tremendous job!!" Ruben Restrepo, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio