Relationships between student peer and faculty evaluations of clinical performance: A pilot study

Abstract

Background: Student peer evaluation is widely used as a form of formative or summative evaluation in a variety of classroom settings; however, the utilization of peer evaluation is not well reported in the nursing literature as part of the clinical evaluation process.

Purpose: The purpose of this pilot study was to examine relationships between student peer and faculty evaluations of clinical performance in a baccalaureate nursing program. Participants consisted of clinical faculty (n = 2) and their nursing students (n = 23) enrolled in their first clinical course in a pre-licensure baccalaureate nursing program. The specific research questions were: 1) Is there a relationship between nursing student peer and faculty evaluation of clinical performance? 2) And if there is a relationship between the two groups, is there a difference between nursing student peer and faculty evaluations?

Methods: A peer evaluation tool was developed with a 5-point Likert scale consisting of 21 items that comprised five domains of clinical performance (communication, professionalism, teamwork, nursing process, and patient safety). Content validity of the tool was established using a panel of nurses with expertise in clinical performance and psycho-
metric measurement. At midterm, students were asked to evaluate each other’s performance using the tool and the faculty also evaluated each student using the same tool. A subscore for each of the domains was created for both student peer and faculty evaluations. The relationships between student peer and faculty evaluation scores were assessed using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficients. Comparisons between student peer and faculty evaluations were made using paired t-tests. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Findings: Significant positive correlations were found between peer and faculty evaluations for all domains. Statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in all of the domains, with students evaluating their peers highest in the domains of patient safety and communication; faculty scored students highest in the domains of patient safety and teamwork. The findings suggest that student peer evaluation can be valuable for students and faculty in clinical education.

Conclusion: Previous studies provided that peer evaluation is a valid and reliable evaluation procedure in dentistry, medicine, pharmacy, and social behavioral sciences. This pilot study has demonstrated that student peer evaluation as part of a formative assessment can be also used for faculty to evaluate students’ clinical performance in a baccalaureate nursing program.