PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9743779

Tutor intervention profile: reliability and validity.

Abstract

An instrument has been developed to provide tutors with feedback about their performance in problem-based tutorial groups. This questionnaire consists of 33 statements reflecting the behaviour of the tutor in the tutorial group when students analyse the case and generate learning issues and the behaviour of the tutor when students report back to the tutorial group about their self-study. The statements are grouped on theoretical dimensions found in the literature about co-operative learning and problem-based learning. This study focuses on the validity and the reliability of this instrument. Confirmatory factor analysis showed that a four-factor model showed a weak fit, whereas each separate factor fitted the data reasonably well. The four factors are: (1) elaboration; (2) directing the learning process; (3) integration of knowledge and (4) stimulating interaction and individual accountability. These factors were strongly correlated with the overall judgement of the tutor at the end of the unit, so the concurrent validity of this instrument was high. Generalizability studies indicated that the rating scales provide reliable information with a sample size of student responses falling within the range of real tutorial group sizes. The results of this study show that the instrument for providing tutors with feedback is valid and reliable. This questionnaire can be used in staff development activities and also provides needs assessment for faculty development.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

W S De Grave, D H Dolmans, C P van der Vleuten. 1998. Tutor intervention profile: reliability and validity.. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.1998.00226.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Musculoskeletal ultrasonography in Europe: results of a rheumatologist-based survey at a EULAR meeting.

OBJECTIVE: To document the practice of musculoskeletal ultrasound (US) by a sample of European rheumatologists attending an annual general meeting of the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR). METHODS: English-language questionnaires were distributed to 180 randomly selected participants attending imaging-related sessions at the XIV EULAR meeting in Glasgow, UK, in 1999. The questionnaire was divided into four sections: Demographics, Education and Training, Current Practice, and Equipment. RESULTS: Ninety-two rheumatologists responded, representing 74 centres from 19 European countries. Seventy-eight (85%) of the respondents either already used US in their clinical practice or would like to use it in the future. Thirty-seven (40%) respondents performed US within their own department. Few had received training at undergraduate level and most had learned informally or by attending courses. Scans were considered most useful for large joints and ligaments/tendons. Only 28 (30%) respondents valued US for guided injections. CONCLUSIONS: This study, although containing an element of selection bias, confirms a great interest in musculoskeletal US by rheumatologists across Europe and a demand which is likely to increase. The reported variation in training and practice between countries suggests a need for standardized training guidelines.

Education, Medical, Undergraduate↗