Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/30623
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorPage, Michaelen_UK
dc.contributor.authorGardner, Johnen_UK
dc.contributor.authorBooth, Joeen_UK
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-15T01:01:14Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-15T01:01:14Z-
dc.date.issued2019-11-15en_UK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1893/30623-
dc.description.abstractFormative assessment is widely accepted as being crucial to promoting student learning and, since 2010, the UK General Medical Council has mandated its use in workplace-based clinical training for all new doctors. As a result, the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) instituted a range of formative workplace-based assessments including the Radiology Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (Rad-DOPS), in which supervisors appraise trainees’ performance in carrying out clinical procedures. This paper reports on the quality of the written feedback in 2,500 Rad-DOPS online feedback forms in addressing the aims of the new assessment approach. Random samples of 500 were selected from the first three years of the new assessment implementation, 2010–13, and from 2016 to 17. Using an appropriate coding frame, the feedback was analysed across the samples against key trainee attributes including stage of training and level of adjudged competence. Criteria for identifying high quality feedback were derived from the literature and a simplified form of qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the conditions associated with high quality feedback. An average of 97% of the assessments contained written feedback but the number of instances of high quality feedback was found to be exceedingly small at around 5%. The paper offers suggestions for making the feedback process more purposeful in achieving the aims of formative assessment.en_UK
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherInforma UK Limiteden_UK
dc.relationPage M, Gardner J & Booth J (2019) Validating written feedback in clinical formative assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education p. 15. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1691974en_UK
dc.rightsThis item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis Group in Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education on 15 Nov 2019, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/02602938.2019.1691974.  en_UK
dc.rights.urihttps://storre.stir.ac.uk/STORREEndUserLicence.pdfen_UK
dc.subjectFormative assessmenten_UK
dc.subjectwritten feedbacken_UK
dc.subjectmedical educationen_UK
dc.subjectworkplace-based assessmentsen_UK
dc.titleValidating written feedback in clinical formative assessmenten_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.rights.embargodate2021-05-16en_UK
dc.rights.embargoreason[Written feedback in WBA Final clean copy.pdf] Publisher requires embargo of 18 months after formal publication.en_UK
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/02602938.2019.1691974en_UK
dc.citation.jtitleAssessment and Evaluation in Higher Educationen_UK
dc.citation.issn1469-297Xen_UK
dc.citation.issn0260-2938en_UK
dc.citation.epage15en_UK
dc.citation.publicationstatusPublisheden_UK
dc.citation.peerreviewedRefereeden_UK
dc.type.statusAM - Accepted Manuscripten_UK
dc.author.emailjohn.gardner@stir.ac.uken_UK
dc.citation.date15/11/2019en_UK
dc.description.notesOutput Status: Forthcoming/Available Onlineen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationQueen Mary, University of Londonen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationEducationen_UK
dc.contributor.affiliationRoyal College of Radiologistsen_UK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000496629100001en_UK
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-85075379606en_UK
dc.identifier.wtid1490856en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0003-1932-9925en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-3844-7305en_UK
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-6683-9541en_UK
dc.date.accepted2019-11-15en_UK
dc.date.filedepositdate2020-01-08en_UK
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Written feedback in WBA Final clean copy.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version665.79 kBAdobe PDFUnder Embargo until 2021-05-16    Request a copy


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.