Premium
Student Practice Evaluation Form‐Revised Edition Online comment bank: Development and reliability analysis
Author(s) -
Rodger Sylvia,
Turpin Merrill,
Copley Jodie,
Coleman Allison,
Chien ChiWen,
Caine AnneMaree,
Brown Ted
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
australian occupational therapy journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.595
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1440-1630
pISSN - 0045-0766
DOI - 10.1111/1440-1630.12115
Subject(s) - reliability (semiconductor) , rating scale , psychology , scale (ratio) , medical education , quality (philosophy) , inclusion (mineral) , computer science , medicine , social psychology , geography , developmental psychology , power (physics) , philosophy , physics , epistemology , quantum mechanics , cartography
Background/aim The reliable evaluation of occupational therapy students completing practice education placements along with provision of appropriate feedback is critical for both students and for universities from a quality assurance perspective. This study describes the development of a comment bank for use with an online version of the Student Practice Evaluation Form‐Revised Edition ( SPEF ‐R Online) and investigates its reliability. Methods A preliminary bank of 109 individual comments (based on previous students’ placement performance) was developed via five stages. These comments reflected all 11 SPEF ‐R domains. A purpose‐designed online survey was used to examine the reliability of the comment bank. A total of 37 practice educators returned surveys, 31 of which were fully completed. Participants were asked to rate each individual comment using the five‐point SPEF ‐R rating scale. Results One hundred and two of 109 comments demonstrated satisfactory agreement with their respective default ratings that were determined by the development team. At each domain level, the intra‐class correlation coefficients (ranging between 0.86 and 0.96) also demonstrated good to excellent inter‐rater reliability. There were only seven items that required rewording prior to inclusion in the final SPEF ‐R Online comment bank. Conclusion The development of the SPEF ‐R Online comment bank offers a source of reliable comments (consistent with the SPEF ‐R rating scale across different domains) and aims to assist practice educators in providing reliable and timely feedback to students in a user‐friendly manner.