Can student tutors act as examiners in an objective structured clinical examination?
Article first published online: 25 OCT 2007
Volume 41, Issue 11, pages 1032–1038, November 2007
How to Cite
Chenot, J.-F., Simmenroth-Nayda, A., Koch, A., Fischer, T., Scherer, M., Emmert, B., Stanske, B., Kochen, M. M. and Himmel, W. (2007), Can student tutors act as examiners in an objective structured clinical examination?. Medical Education, 41: 1032–1038. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02895.x
- Issue published online: 25 OCT 2007
- Article first published online: 25 OCT 2007
- Received 4 July 2006; editorial comments to authors 4 September 2006, 1 December 2006, 15 May 2007; accepted for publication 15 June 2007
- educational measurement/*methods;
- *education, medical, undergraduate;
- *peer review;
- *students, medical;
- observer variation
Context The dissemination of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) is hampered by requirements for high levels of staffing and a significantly higher workload compared with multiple-choice examinations. Senior medical students may be able to support faculty staff to assess their peers. The aim of this study is to assess the reliability of student tutors as OSCE examiners and their acceptance by their peers.
Methods Using a checklist and a global rating, teaching doctors (TDs) and student tutors (STs) simultaneously assessed students in basic clinical skills at 4 OSCE stations. The inter-rater agreement between TDs and STs was calculated by kappa values and paired t-tests. Students then completed a questionnaire to assess their acceptance of student peer examiners.
Results All 214 Year 3 students at the University of Göttingen Medical School were evaluated in spring 2005. Student tutors gave slightly better average grades than TDs (differences of 0.02–0.20 on a 5-point Likert scale). Inter-rater agreement at the stations ranged from 0.41 to 0·64 for checklist assessment and global ratings; overall inter-rater agreement on the final grade was 0.66. Most students felt that assessment by STs would result in the same grades as assessment by TDs (64%) and that it would be similarly objective (69%). Nearly all students (95%) felt confident that they could evaluate their peers themselves in an OSCE.
Conclusions On the basis of our results, STs can act as examiners in summative OSCEs to assess basic medical skills. The slightly better grades observed are of no practical concern. Students accepted assessment performed by STs.