Reasoning in Assessment: How do clinical teachers assess undergraduate clinical performance in physiotherapy? A mixed methods pilot study

Background Research suggests that similar expert-novice differences in cognitive reasoning processes exist in the assessment of trainee performance as in clinical practice (Govaerts et al, 2011). The aim of this pilot study was to investigate the assessment reasoning of Irish clinical physiotherapy teachers, both tutors (specific teaching posts) and educators (clinicians). Ethical approval was obtained. SUMMARY OF WORK Three focus groups of 4-5 physiotherapy teachers were conducted. Teachers were shown a standardised video of a final-year student-patient encounter and asked to rate the performance before (T1) and after (T2) the group discussion using a standardised marking scheme. Focus group discussions were transcribed and analysed for themes by three researchers. SUMMARY OF RESULTS Teachers’ ratings resulted in grades of between ‘fail’ and ‘2.1’ (46-69%) at T1. Six educator scores changed at T2, resulting in a lower grade. Tutor grades remained unchanged. Themes of effectiveness, clinical (practical) skills and history-taking emerged within all groups. CONCLUSION While emerging themes between groups were consistent, within-group discussions revealed a wide variation in perceptions of the student performance. Peer discussion may also have an impact on assessment scores. TAKE-HOME MESSAGE Differences in clinical physiotherapy teachers’ reasoning may impact on consistency in assessment. Expert-novice differences in clinical performance assessment require further research.