Students’ perceptions of fairness and accuracy in clinical practice evaluation

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to investigate dental students' perceptions regarding the evaluation of clinical practice and to explore the factors influencing these perceptions.Methods: An online survey was conducted targeting third and fourth-year dental students from 11 nationwide dental schools. The survey focused on their perceptions of the accuracy and fairness of two clinical practices: 1) clinical clerkship in specialty clinics, and 2) direct patient care in pre-doctoral treatment centers. Additionally, the effects of different clerkship models (disciplinary block, longitudinal integrated), evaluation units (individual subject, integrated subject), and grading systems (grading, pass/fail) were assessed.Results: The overall perception of fairness and accuracy in clinical practice evaluation was found to be low. Students in disciplinary block clinical practice settings reported lower perceptions of evaluation accuracy and fairness compared to those in longitudinal integrated or mixed schedule types. Furthermore, the grading system influenced the perception of fairness and accuracy in the evaluation of clinical practices. Regarding direct patient care in pre-doctoral treatment centers, the evaluation units significantly impacted students' perceptions, although the grading system did not. Groups with grading systems showed lower perceptions compared to those with pass/fail or mixed evaluation systems.Conclusion: The study reveals that dental students perceive clinical practice evaluations as generally unfair and inaccurate, particularly within disciplinary block schedules. To improve future dental education, adopting longitudinal integrated schedules could be considered to enhance the perceived fairness and accuracy of clinical practice evaluations.