Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Nov-Dec;45(6):609-14.
doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-45.6.609.

Accuracy and reliability of peer assessment of athletic training psychomotor laboratory skills

Affiliations

Accuracy and reliability of peer assessment of athletic training psychomotor laboratory skills

Melissa C Marty et al. J Athl Train. 2010 Nov-Dec.

Abstract

Context: Peer assessment is defined as students judging the level or quality of a fellow student's understanding. No researchers have yet demonstrated the accuracy or reliability of peer assessment in athletic training education.

Objective: To determine the accuracy and reliability of peer assessment of athletic training students' psychomotor skills.

Design: Cross-sectional study.

Setting: Entry-level master's athletic training education program.

Patients or other participants: First-year (n = 5) and second-year (n = 8) students.

Main outcome measure(s): Participants evaluated 10 videos of a peer performing 3 psychomotor skills (middle deltoid manual muscle test, Faber test, and Slocum drawer test) on 2 separate occasions using a valid assessment tool. Accuracy of each peer-assessment score was examined through percentage correct scores. We used a generalizability study to determine how reliable athletic training students were in assessing a peer performing the aforementioned skills. Decision studies using generalizability theory demonstrated how the peer-assessment scores were affected by the number of participants and number of occasions.

Results: Participants had a high percentage of correct scores: 96.84% for the middle deltoid manual muscle test, 94.83% for the Faber test, and 97.13% for the Slocum drawer test. They were not able to reliably assess a peer performing any of the psychomotor skills on only 1 occasion. However, the φ increased (exceeding the 0.70 minimal standard) when 2 participants assessed the skill on 3 occasions (φ = 0.79) for the Faber test, with 1 participant on 2 occasions (φ = 0.76) for the Slocum drawer test, and with 3 participants on 2 occasions for the middle deltoid manual muscle test (φ = 0.72).

Conclusions: Although students did not detect all errors, they assessed their peers with an average of 96% accuracy. Having only 1 student assess a peer performing certain psychomotor skills was less reliable than having more than 1 student assess those skills on more than 1 occasion. Peer assessment of psychomotor skills could be an important part of the learning process and a tool to supplement instructor assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Orsmond P., Merry S., Callaghan A. Implementation of a formative assessment model incorporating peer and self-assessment. Innov Educ Teach Int. 2004;41(3):273–290.
    1. Ladyshewsky R., Gotjamanos E. Communication skill development in health professional education: the use of standardised patients in combination with a peer assessment strategy. J Allied Health. 1997;26(4):177–186. - PubMed
    1. Welsh M. M. Engaging with peer assessment in post-registration nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2007;7(2):75–81. - PubMed
    1. Henning J. M., Weidner T. G., Jones J. Peer-assisted learning in the athletic training clinical setting. J Athl Train. 2006;41(1):102–108. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Knight K. Assessing Clinical Proficiencies in Athletic Training: A Modular Approach. 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2001. 41, 54, 209.

Publication types