Dear Sir
Pervaz Iqbal et al.’s (Citation2014) critique of Basehore et al.’s (Citation2014) research article on peer-rating by medical students makes for some interesting reading. Potential limitations were identified in feedback quality, assessment authenticity, lack of clinical experience in peers and clinical misconceptions. It cannot be ignored, however, that peer assessment has fantastic potential with benefits for both students undergoing assessment and those providing it too. Teaching is only possible with a thorough understanding of the subject material and this can only help learning for both the parties.
Of course stretched resources and faculty pressures might make peer-assisted learning a pragmatic economic choice which can only detract from the real benefits and make it look like learning “on the cheap”. However, teaching is becoming increasingly recognized as a vital skill of the doctor, not only as the educator for his or her patients, but also in developing and nurturing the skills of medical students and more junior colleagues. It is to this end that I believe formal instruction in medical education should be incorporated into the medical school curriculum, in order to prepare medical students for their future teaching roles. There is no doubt that peer-assessment would be a useful element in this training.
The doctor as an educator is not a new concept; from the ancient Hippocratic Oath to the most recent GMC guidance, the doctor who teaches is seen as fulfilling an intrinsic element of their role. Why then, should an understanding of basic teaching theory not become a necessary requirement for all newly qualified junior doctors? This would not only prove beneficial to those who would receive teaching from junior doctors, but would also help these young practitioners cement their own understanding and develop new skills valuable in their future careers. If the benefits of peer-assisted learning are to be reaped then we need to sow some basic teaching theory during the undergraduate season.
Declaration of interest: The author reports no conflicts of interest.
References
- Basehore PM, Pomerantz SC, Gentile M. 2014. Reliability and benefits of medical student peers in rating complex clinical skills. Med Teach 36(5):409–414
- Pervaz Iqbal M, O’Sullivan AJ, Velan G, Balasooriya C. 2014. Letters to the editor: Are we seeing the full picture of peer-assessment in medical education? Med Teach 36(11):1007