Assessing Validity and Bias in a Peer Evaluation Tool: Associations with Demographics and Performance in Team-based Learning.
- 1Indiana University School of Medicine, 715 Clinic Dr., West Lafayette, Indianapolis, IN 47907 USA.
Abstract
A formative Peer Evaluation Tool (PET) was developed for use in a Team Based Learning (TBL) graduate histology course. The PET has been evaluated for content and construct validity evidence with three dimensions that assess preparation, providing feedback, and feedback receptivity and attitude. The aim of this work is to evaluate further validity evidence by analyzing the relationship between PET scores, demographic variables, individual readiness assessment test (iRAT) scores, and the preparation dimension of the PET for five cohorts of students. Differences between timepoints (e.g., PET1 vs. PET2) were assessed via paired t-tests. Spearman's correlation and linear regression analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between all factors (SPSS v.29). There is a significant (p < 0.05) difference between timepoints for all factors except iRAT scores. There is a significant positive correlation among all scores, except between Prep1&2 and TBL1&2 scores with the strongest correlations between PET1&2 and Prep1&2 scores. PET scores have no correlation to demographics. Preparedness to the team is critical for TBL and these results suggest that Prep scores can predict preparation for iRATs, suggesting that students can evaluate their peers' preparedness for TBL. This study provides additional evidence for the value and use of this formative PET.Supplementary information
The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-026-02759-8.
Related
- Lower Body Functional Test Performance Varies Based on Patient Demographics
- Performance evaluation of a direct chemiluminescence assay for 25-hydroxyvitamin D and its application in assessing vitamin D status among reproductive-age women in southeastern China
- Assessing the construct validity of cross-national harmonized cognitive assessments using age.
- Comparative validity and reproducibility of questionnaires in assessing types, frequency, and quantity of sweetened beverage consumption among Mahidol University students
- A novel predictive model for DNA mismatch repair deficient colorectal carcinoma for cost-effective MMR testing in low-resource settings: HERALD-MMR (Histological Evaluation and Risk Assessment using Local Demographics for Mismatch Repair).
BibTeX
@article{robertson2026assessing,
title = {{Assessing Validity and Bias in a Peer Evaluation Tool: Associations with Demographics and Performance in Team-based Learning.}},
author = {Kyle A Robertson and Elizabeth R Agosto and Jessica N Byram},
journal = {Medical science educator},
year = {2026},
month = may,
doi = {10.1007/s40670-026-02759-8},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968763},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Assessing Validity and Bias in a Peer Evaluation Tool: Associations with Demographics and Performance in Team-based Learning.
AU - Kyle A Robertson
AU - Elizabeth R Agosto
AU - Jessica N Byram
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/05/20
JO - Medical science educator
DO - 10.1007/s40670-026-02759-8
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42968763
AB - A formative Peer Evaluation Tool (PET) was developed for use in a Team Based Learning (TBL) graduate histology course. The PET has been evaluated for content and construct validity evidence with three dimensions that assess preparation, providing feedback, and feedback receptivity and attitude. The aim of this work is to evaluate further validity evidence by analyzing the relationship between PET scores, demographic variables, individual readiness assessment test (iRAT) scores, and the preparation dimension of the PET for five cohorts of students. Differences between timepoints (e.g., PET1 vs. PET2) were assessed via paired t-tests. Spearman's correlation and linear regression analyses were performed to investigate the relationship between all factors (SPSS v.29). There is a significant (p < 0.05) difference between timepoints for all factors except iRAT scores. There is a significant positive correlation among all scores, except between Prep1&2 and TBL1&2 scores with the strongest correlations between PET1&2 and Prep1&2 scores. PET scores have no correlation to demographics. Preparedness to the team is critical for TBL and these results suggest that Prep scores can predict preparation for iRATs, suggesting that students can evaluate their peers' preparedness for TBL. This study provides additional evidence for the value and use of this formative PET.Supplementary information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-026-02759-8.
SN - 2156-8650
ER -