How Teachers Adapt Their Cognitive Strategies When Using Entrustment Scales. (November 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Forte, Milena; Morson, Natalie; Mirchandani, Natasha; Grundland, Batya; Fernando, Oshan; Rubenstein, Warren
• Is Part Of: Academic medicine. Volume 96(2021)Supplement 11
• Publication Date: 2021-11
• Subjects: Medical education -- Periodicals; Medical policy -- Periodicals; Medical personnel -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.711
• DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004287
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1040-2446

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: Rater cognition is a field of study focused on individual cognitive processes used by medical teachers when completing assessments. Much has been written about the role of rater cognition in the use of traditional assessment scales. Entrustment scales (ES) are becoming the tool of choice for workplace-based assessments. It is not known how moving to an entrustment framework may cause teachers to adapt their cognitive rating strategies. This study aimed to explore this gap by asking teachers to describe their thinking when making rating decisions using a validated ES. Method: Using purposive sampling, family medicine teachers supervising obstetrical care were invited to participate in cognitive interviews. Teachers were interviewed between December 2018 and March 2019 using retrospective verbal protocol analysis. They were asked to describe their experiences of rating residents in the last 6 months using new ES. Constructivist grounded theory guided data collection and analysis. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed iteratively. A constant comparative approach was used to code and analyze the data until consensus was reached regarding emerging themes. Results: There was variability in how teachers used the ES. Faculty describe several ways in which they ultimately navigated the tool to say what they wanted to say. Four key themes emerged: (1) teachers interpreted the anchors differently based on their cognitive framework, (2) teachers differed in how they were able to cognitively shift away from traditional rating scales, (3) teachers struggled to limit assessments to a report on observed behavior, and (4) teachers contextualized their ratings. Conclusions: Variability in teachers' interpretation of learner performance persists in entrustment frameworks. Rater's individual cognitive strategies and how they observe, process, and integrate their thoughts into assessments form part of a rich picture of learner progress. These insights can be harnessed to contribute to decisions regarding readiness for unsupervised practice. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.