Is Peer Assessment Reliable in Objectively Structured Clinical Examination?

Abstract

Objective:The study was designed to evaluate the reliability of the peer assessment in the objectively structured clinical examination (OSCE) for the summative assessment of 4th grade students at the end of general surgery clerkship.Method:The study was planned prospectively with the permission of the Dean of Medicine Faculty and approval of the ethics committee. The 6th grade students who were in the surgery rotation participated in the study as peer assessors (PA). Both peers and department of general surgery assessed the students. Pass/fail point was accepted as 60. The scores of OSCE and performance evaluation given by peers and faculty were compared statistically.Results:Twenty-three students completed general surgery clerkship. Ten students (43.5%) were female. According to performance scores given by the faculty, 15 (65.2%) of the 23 students were successful, while all students were considered successful (having a grade of 60 or more) based on the scores of peer evaluation. There was a significant difference between the faculty members and PA with regard to the performance evaluation (p=0.008). The faculty members found five students (27.8%) successful in the OSCE (having a grade of 60 or more). However, ten students (43.5%) received a score of at least six from peer evaluation. Although there was a difference, it was not significant (p=0.063). Gender did not affect scoring in performance evaluation and OSCE application.Conclusion:Although there was a difference between faculty members and peer evaluators in the performance evaluation, no difference was observed in OSCE. In conclusion, OSCE assessment by peer evaluators is reliable.

Keywords

• education
• objective structured clinical examination
• peer assessment
• reliability
• surgery