Lightning Talk

Piloting the Usefulness of a Single-point Rubric in Interprofessional Education

Thursday, October 22, 2020, 11:00 am - 12:00 pm EDT

Much attention has focused on the development of standardized instruments to assess competencies for collaborative practice in interprofessional education (IPE). However, standardized scales provide limited meaningful feedback to enhance student interprofessional learning. To address this issue, a single-point rubric was developed to support the provision of structured narrative feedback to students in competency-based assessments (CBAs). This research aims to 1) develop and pilot a single-point rubric for assessing health profession students’ interprofessional competencies, and 2) evaluate the rubric’s usefulness for enhancing student learning and the construction of structured feedback by facilitators in CBAs. A single-point rubric was developed and piloted in foundational and elective interprofessional courses. Surveys, focus groups, and interviews were conducted with students, facilitators, and course developers to explore the usefulness of the single-point rubric. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Primary outcomes from the study included that the content of the single-point rubric is comprehensive, the feedback on the rubric is useful for facilitating student IP learning, and facilitators can write structured feedback by using the rubric.

This Lightning Talk will describe the development of a single-point rubric and explain its benefits and limitations in CBAs. We will demonstrate how the single-point rubric is both a teaching and learning tool in IPE. Assessments in IPE are often created for scoring, with less consideration as a support for learning. Student-centredness is a key motivator in using the single-point rubric, as students engage with the rubric criteria and associated feedback, and are encouraged to reflect on their learning. Course developers and facilitators participate in the development and application of the rubric including identification of learning outcomes, performance criteria, and how to give meaningful feedback.

This research was funded by the Teaching and Learning Enhancement Fund, University of Alberta. No grant number was provided by the funding program.