Assessing Dental Students’ Competence: Best Practice Recommendations in the Performance Assessment Literature and Investigation of Current Practices in Predoctoral Dental Education

American Indian/Alaska Native Programs, School of Dental Medicine, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Denver, Anschutz Medical Campus, Mail Stop F800, P.O. Box 6508, Aurora, CO 80045, USA.
Journal of dental education (Impact Factor: 1.04). 01/2009; 72(12):1405-35.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In this article, the Task Force on Student Outcomes Assessment of the American Dental Education Association's Commission on Change and Innovation in Dental Education describes the current status of student outcomes assessment in U.S. dental education. This review is divided into six sections. The first summarizes the literature on assessment of dental students' performance. Section two discusses catalysts, with a focus on problem-based learning, for development of new assessment methods, while the third section presents several resources and guides that can be used to inform selection of assessment techniques for various domains of competence. The fourth section describes the methodology and results of a 2008 survey of current assessment practices in U.S. dental schools. In the fifth section, findings from this survey are discussed within the context of competency-based education, the educational model for the predoctoral curriculum endorsed by the American Dental Education Association and prescribed by the Commission on Dental Accreditation. The article concludes with a summary of assessments recommended as optimal strategies to measure three components of professional competence based on the triangulation model. The survey of assessment practices in predoctoral education was completed by 931 course directors, representing 45 percent of course directors nationwide, from fifty-three of the fifty-six U.S. dental schools. Survey findings indicate that five traditional mainstays of student performance evaluation-multiple-choice testing, lab practicals, daily grades, clinical competency exams, and procedural requirements-still comprise the primary assessment tools in dental education. The survey revealed that a group of newer assessment techniques, although frequently identified as best practices in the literature and commonly used in other areas of health professions education, are rarely employed in predoctoral dental education.

Download full-text


Available from: William D Hendricson, Aug 16, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The need for interprofessional education is now firmly embedded in undergraduate healthcare curricula frameworks in Northern Ireland and has a role to play in preparation for professional practice. A questionnaire determining students' "readiness" for interprofessional education has been widely used and reported in the literature but there are other factors that contribute to students' abilities to learn in an interprofessional context. Pre-qualification healthcare education can be viewed as having three inter-related components, intra-professional, interprofessional and intra-personal learning; the third of these underpinning the other two. Understanding more about personal learning needs can contribute to preparation for interprofessional interaction. A Studying and Learning Preferences Inventory (SALPI) was developed and validated for use with a range of healthcare professionals to assist in this process.
    Journal of Interprofessional Care 04/2010; 24(4):412-21. DOI:10.3109/13561820903373210 · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to argue for alternative assessment methods (i.e. concept map) considering the changes in demography in higher education. In the case of school of dentistry, for example, there is an urgent call for a catalyst for new assessment methods in dental education in view of the drive to comprehensively assess professional competence to cater to the current work requirement; this quantitative study compared two different approaches to assessment following a first‐year undergraduate course for dental and hygiene and therapy students. The assessment methods compared were multiple‐choice questions and concept mapping. The data suggest that concept mapping can be appropriate for non‐traditional students (i.e. adult learners), particularly those who already have professional experience in related practice. This is because concept mapping allows learners to locate their new knowledge in a broader social and experiential frame. The implications are discussed.
    Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 08/2010; 35(5):577-595. DOI:10.1080/02602931003782525 · 0.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The assessment of clinical competence in health disciplines is a critical issue. Universities have a responsibility to graduate students who can demonstrate fitness to practice because clinical competence relates directly to the quality of patients' care-the quality of their treatment, their health outcomes, and their experience. In respect of the last of these, this article argues that the nature of what we term "clinical competence" ought to recognize the patient before the medical/dental condition or clinical intervention and, in order to achieve this, dental education should adopt learning, teaching, and assessment strategies that develop integrated learning outcomes consistent with a paradigm of comprehensive care. The article describes the ways in which this paradigm has been operationalized in the learning, teaching, and assessment strategies at Griffith University in Australia. It places a particular focus upon the assessment methods used in the Bachelor of Oral Health program. In this way, the article aims to illustrate ways that the quality of the assessment of clinical competence can, and should, be improved. While this is a work in progress, this description may be useful for educators at other academic dental institutions who wish to adopt, adapt, and develop similar approaches.
    Journal of dental education 12/2010; 74(12):1367-79. · 1.04 Impact Factor
Show more