...
首页> 外文期刊>Medical teacher >How can we reduce bias during an academic assessment reappraisal?
【24h】

How can we reduce bias during an academic assessment reappraisal?

机译:在学术评估重新评估期间,我们如何减少偏见?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Aims: To describe potential sources of bias during an academic assessment reappraisal and ways to mitigate these. Methods: We describe why the typical scenario of an academic assessment reappraisal - where committee members are asked to weigh contrasting accounts of past events that they did not witness, and to rate elusive constructs, such as "fairness" - is prone to multiple types of bias, including attribute substitution, default bias, confirmation bias, and impact bias. We also discuss how increased awareness of sources of bias and of debiasing strategies can improve the validity of decision making. Results: Strategies that can reduce bias in reappraisal include clearly articulating and focusing on the reappraisal question (did bias cause a wrong decision to be made?), educating those involved in the reappraisal of the types of bias that frequently occur in teaching and assessment (including biases that they themselves may introduce to the reappraisal), and ensuring that those involved in the reappraisal contribute equally to making decisions and recommendation. Conclusions: All academic assessments of students, particularly those that involve subjective ratings of performance, are prone to bias, which threatens the integrity of the assessment process. Given the high stakes of academic assessments, we feel that each medical school should have a process for assessment reappraisal that reduces, rather than compounds, the likelihood of wrong assessment decisions.
机译:目的:在学术评估中描述潜在的偏见来源以及减轻这些的方法。方法:我们描述了为什么学术评估重新评估的典型情景 - 委员会成员被要求权衡他们没有见证的过去事件的对比,以及评定难以捉摸的构造,例如“公平性” - 容易出现多种类型的偏见,包括属性替换,默认偏置,确认偏置和影响偏差。我们还讨论了对偏差源和脱叠策略的认识提高程度如何提高决策的有效性。结果:可以减少重新评估偏见的策略包括明确阐明和关注重新评估问题(偏见是否导致做出错误的决定?),教育那些参与经常发生在教学和评估中的偏差类型的重新评估的人(包括偏见,他们本身可能会向重新评估介绍),并确保参与重新评估的人同样贡献决定和建议。结论:学生的所有学术评估,特别是那些涉及性能主观评级的人,都容易发生偏见,这威胁着评估过程的完整性。鉴于学术评估的高股份,我们觉得每个医学院都应该有一个评估重新评估的过程,而不是化合物,而不是化合物,错误的评估决策的可能性。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Medical teacher》 |2019年第11期|共4页
  • 作者单位

    Univ Calgary Cummings Sch Med Off Undergrad Med Educ Calgary AB Canada;

    Univ Calgary Cummings Sch Med Off Undergrad Med Educ Calgary AB Canada;

    Univ Calgary Cummings Sch Med Off Undergrad Med Educ Calgary AB Canada;

    Univ Calgary Cummings Sch Med Off Undergrad Med Educ Calgary AB Canada;

    Univ Calgary Cummings Sch Med Off Undergrad Med Educ Calgary AB Canada;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 医药、卫生;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号