↓ Skip to main content

The grades that clinical teachers give students modifies the grades they receive

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The grades that clinical teachers give students modifies the grades they receive
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10459-017-9783-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Paget, Gurbir Brar, Pamela Veale, Kevin Busche, Sylvain Coderre, Wayne Woloschuk, Kevin McLaughlin

Abstract

Prior studies have shown a correlation between the grades students receive and how they rate their teacher in the classroom. In this study, the authors probe this association on clinical rotations and explore potential mechanisms. All In-Training Evaluation Reports (ITERs) for students on mandatory clerkship rotations from April 1, 2013 to January 31, 2015 were matched with the corresponding student's rating of their teacher (SRT). The date and time that ITERs and SRTs were submitted was used to divide SRTs into those submitted before versus after the corresponding ITER was submitted. Multilevel, mixed effects linear regression was used to examine the association between SRT, ITER rating, and whether the ITER was submitted before or after SRT. Of 2373 paired evaluations, 1098 (46.3%) SRT were submitted before the teacher had submitted the ITER. There was a significant interaction between explanatory variables: when ITER ratings had not yet been submitted, the regression coefficient for this association was 0.25 (95% confidence interval [0.17, 0.33], p < 0.001), whereas the regression coefficient was significantly higher when ITER ratings were submitted prior to SRT (0.40 [0.31, 0.49], p < 0.001). Finding an association between SRT and ITER when students do not know their ITER ratings suggests that SRTs can capture attributes of effective teaching, but the effect modification when students have access to their ITER rating supports grade satisfaction bias. Further studies are needed to explain the mechanism of grade satisfaction and to identify other biases that may impact the validity of SRT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 6 25%
Unknown 8 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 29%
Social Sciences 5 21%
Environmental Science 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Unknown 10 42%
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 20 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,388,641
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#602
of 856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,453
of 312,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 856 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 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 312,441 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.