Student Peer Assessment in Clinical Operative Dentistry: A Retrospective Study

TL;DR

This study compares how dental students and instructors assess cavity preparations and finds peer assessments become more reliable over time.

Contribution

The study demonstrates that peer assessment reliability improves with time and can be a useful tool in dental education.

Findings

Peer assessments were significantly higher than instructor assessments at the start of the academic year.

The gap between peer and instructor assessments decreased over time.

Peer assessment reliability was consistent across genders and academic years.

Abstract

To compare peer assessment with instructors' assessment of cavity preparations prepared by undergraduate dental students in operative clinical sessions and to assess the effect of different variables such as gender, academic year of the students, and timing on the reliability and accuracy of the peer assessments.

A retrospective cohort study evaluating 2715 cavities prepared by undergraduate dental students and assessed by instructors and peers using a standardized grading rubric utilized formally within the operative courses. The effect of gender, level of academic year, and timing of assessment was studied. Descriptive statistics and paired sample t-test were used to analyze the results.

Significantly higher (p < 0.001) peer compared to instructor assessment was found during the first 2 months of the academic year, which gradually reduced towards the end of the academic year. This was consistent between genders and throughout the levels of academic years.

Peer assessment is reliable in gauging the level of understanding and clinical judgment skills of undergraduate dental students. It is recommended to employ peer assessment as a reliable strategy in the active learning process in dental operative clinical courses.

Figures