↓ Skip to main content

Expertise in performance assessment: assessors’ perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
Title
Expertise in performance assessment: assessors’ perspectives
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10459-012-9392-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Berendonk, Renée E. Stalmeijer, Lambert W. T. Schuwirth

Abstract

The recent rise of interest among the medical education community in individual faculty making subjective judgments about medical trainee performance appears to be directly related to the introduction of notions of integrated competency-based education and assessment for learning. Although it is known that assessor expertise plays an important role in performance assessment, the roles played by different factors remain to be unraveled. We therefore conducted an exploratory study with the aim of building a preliminary model to gain a better understanding of assessor expertise. Using a grounded theory approach, we conducted seventeen semi-structured interviews with individual faculty members who differed in professional background and assessment experience. The interviews focused on participants' perceptions of how they arrived at judgments about student performance. The analysis resulted in three categories and three recurring themes within these categories: the categories assessor characteristics, assessors' perceptions of the assessment tasks, and the assessment context, and the themes perceived challenges, coping strategies, and personal development. Central to understanding the key processes in performance assessment appear to be the dynamic interrelatedness of the different factors and the developmental nature of the processes. The results are supported by literature from the field of expertise development and in line with findings from social cognition research. The conceptual framework has implications for faculty development and the design of programs of assessment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Spain 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 142 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 14%
Researcher 17 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 8%
Professor 8 5%
Other 33 22%
Unknown 36 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 27%
Social Sciences 29 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Computer Science 10 7%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 36 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 September 2015.
All research outputs
#13,869,424
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#579
of 849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,044
of 164,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 164,116 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.