Formative peer evaluation instrument for a team-based learning course: Content and construct validity

References

• Burgess AW, McGregor DM. Use of established guidelines when reporting on interprofessional team-based learning in health professions student education: a systematic review. Acad Med. 2022;97(1):143–151. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004372
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess A, Roberts C, Lane AS, et al. Peer review in team-based learning: influencing feedback literacy. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):426. doi: 10.1186/s12909-021-02821-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaelsen L, Sweet M. The essential elements of team-based learning. In: Larry K. Michaelsen and L. Dee Fink (eds.), Team-based learning: small-group learning’s next big step: new directions for teaching and learning, number 116. Vol. 103. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons; 2008. p. 7–27. doi: 10.1002/tl.330
   Google Scholar
• Cestone CM, Levine RE, Lane DR. Peer assessment and evaluation in team-based learning. In: Larry K. Michaelsen and L. Dee Fink (eds.), Team-based learning: small group learning’s next big step: new directions for teaching and learning, number. Vol. 116. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sones; 2008. p. 69–77. doi: 10.1002/tl.334
   Google Scholar
• Haidet P, Levine RE, Parmelee DX, et al. Perspective: guidelines for reporting team-based learning activities in the medical and health sciences education literature. Acad Med. 2012;87(3):292–299. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318244759e
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine R. Peer evaluation in team-based learning. In: Larry Michaelsen, Dean Parmelee, Kathryn K. McMahon, and Ruth E. Levine (eds.), Team-based learning for health professions education: a guide to using small groups for improving learning. Sterling: Stylus; 2008. p. 103–111.
   Google Scholar
• Fete MG, Haight RC, Clapp P, et al. Peer evaluation instrument development, administration, and assessment in a team-based learning curriculum. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(4):68. doi: 10.5688/ajpe81468
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speyer R, Pilz W, Van Der Kruis J, et al. Reliability and validity of student peer assessment in medical education: a systematic review. Med Teach. 2011;33(11):e572–e585. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.610835
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine RE, Kelly KPA, Karakoc T, et al. Peer evaluation in a clinical clerkship: students’ attitudes, experiences, and correlations with traditional assessments. Acad Psychiatry. 2007;31(1):19–24. doi: 10.1176/appi.ap.31.1.19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dannefer EF, Henson LC, Bierer SB, et al. Peer assessment of professional competence. Med Educ. 2005;39(7):713–722. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02193.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M, et al. An analysis of peer, self, and tutor assessment in problem-based learning tutorials. Med Teach. 2007;29(5):e122–e132. doi: 10.1080/01421590701294323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorsuch RL. Factor analysis. New York: Routledge; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Dziuban CD, Shirkey EC. When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychol Bull. 1974;81(6):358–361. doi: 10.1037/h0036316
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cattell RB. The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behav Res. 1966;1(2):245–276. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Velicer WF, Eaton CA, Fava JL. Determining the number of components: a review and evaluation of alternative procedures. In: Goffin RD, Helmes E, editor. Problems and solutions in human assessment. Boston (MA): Erlbaum; 2000. p. 41–71.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt N. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychol Assess. 1996;8(4):350–353. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.350
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Topping K. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research. 1998;68(3):249–276. doi: 10.3102/00346543068003249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kweon YR, Park J. Using the design-thinking method to develop and validate a peer evaluation scale for team-based learning (PES-TBL) for nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2023;127:105849. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105849
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess AW, McGregor DM, Mellis CM. Applying established guidelines to team-based learning programs in medical schools: a systematic review. Acad Med. 2014;89(4):678–688. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000162
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michaelsen LK, Davidson N, Major CH. Team-based learning practices and principles in comparison with cooperative learning and problem-based learning. Teach High Educ J. 2014;25:57.
   Google Scholar
• Dutta S, He M, Tsang DC. Reflection and peer assessment to promote self-directed learning in higher education. J Educ Res Rev. 2023;11(3):35–46. doi: 10.33495/jerr_v11i3.23.111
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky LS, Cole M. Mind in society: development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Li H, Xiong Y, Hunter CV, et al. Does peer assessment promote student learning? A meta-analysis. Assess Eval High Educ. 2020;45(2):193–211. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2019.1620679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stonewall J, Dorneich M, Dorius C, et al. CoNECD-The collaborative network for engineering and computing diversity conference; 2018. https://peer.asee.org/29510.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan RL. Generalizability theory. Educ Meas. 1992;11(4):27–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.1992.tb00260.x
   Google Scholar