2017 Abstracts – Other

144 – A report on face-to-face peer-evaluation
Yukari Igarashi, Mariko Iida, Yoko Shimpuku

BACKGROUND: While starting the course of “Maternal-Newborn Nursing” for undergraduate students in 2013, we had our students do their peer-evaluation. However, not all students responded positively. This was because peer-evaluation was conducted anonymously which led to a sense of distrust. Therefore, we started to do our peer-evaluation face-to-face to solve this problem and the results will be reported below.

DESCRIPTION: This was a course from April to July in 2016 and Peer-evaluation was planned three times (May, June, and July). First, students exchanged messages to each other how they contributed to the team. Next, they described what they learned from the peer-evaluation. Lastly, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to measure how much they felt they worked as a team and the reasons were written down. The Research Ethics Committee at St. Luke’s International University, Tokyo, Japan (no.16-A008.) approved this study.

RESULTS: A total of 97 students, six to seven students in a team, completed the peer-evaluation. There were no negative comments about doing it in the face-to-face way. Moreover, by doing so, they were more eager to the next TBL session. Also, sharing their thoughts led to a sense of being a team and the average score of the VAS increased every time. At the second time, the VAS score decreased in one out of 16 teams, and at the third time, VAS score decreased in five teams. This was because the readiness differed among the team members which led to distrust between each other. Also, they described that they had assignments in other courses which made them overloaded.

CONCLUSION: Conducting face-to-face peer-evaluation seems to have a positive effect to the students. Making it more effectively, we will need to reconsider how we construct our course and the amount of assignments we give the students.

Copyright 2019 | Privacy Policy | Empowered by Agentic

Discussion Center

Welcome to our Discussion Center. Here, we look at research papers and discuss them in the context of hemodynamics monitoring. We hope that this hub will be helpful for medical professionals and scientists alike. Join the conversation.

TBLC does not host these documents; we just provide a commenting area and links to the documents' original landing pages. If you are the copyright holder for a document and you wish for us to remove its link, please contact us immediately.

 

List of Documents

2017 Abstracts – Other

Document Details