I have taught the Quality of Medical Practice (QMP) component of the Phase 1 Medicine program on the Port Macquarie Rural Clinical Campus (PMQ-RCC) for the last 6 years, while not being convenor of the course, I have made significant contributions to the teaching of this component locally. In each of the Phase 1 Medicine courses, the students undertake an individual assignment and a group project. In 2023 the MFAC1522 Beginnings, Growth and Development (BGDB) group project was redesigned, and is formatted as a "Journal Manuscript Peer Review".
The revised assessment (designed by Dr Amir Ariff) takes the form of a peer-review critique tailored to match the requirements of the target journal, Nature. The students were asked to maintain the original article's format, adhering to the sequence of headings and sub-headings, which include Abstract, Introduction, Results, Discussion, and Methods. The aim of the assessment is to engage the students in impartial evaluation of each section, highlighting both the positives and negatives. Notably, the students pay close attention to the Methods section, particularly focusing on the multivariate analysis conducted - as this is an important aspect for the QMP component of the Phase 1 program. The students are asked to provide background information on the statistical test employed to ensure clarity for the 'editor' (the examiner) reviewing our critique - this demonstrates the students' learning in statistical analysis and understanding of statistical tests in the context of real research articles. This project blends aspects of peer-review with additional insights drawn from literature exploration into the article's results and methodologies.
As assessor of my student cohort's projects in 2023, I integrated an innovative marking rubric and replaced the formative project presentation with a formative peer-review exercise. The students were able to clearly see the expectations of the assessment through utilising the rubric - which was provided to them at the beginning of the term. An assessment rubric that I created based on my learnings in my Graduate Certificate of University Learning and Teaching (GCULT) studies (2021). This rubric was created using constructive alignment to program graduate capabilities, Blooms Taxonomy, Standards Based Assessment and Assessment for Learning principles. The rubric (attached) outlines the standards and expectations for each grade level. The rubric was also included in the formative peer-review exercise, where student groups were asked to swap draft projects and utilise the structured peer-review form (attached) to provide feedback. The students were asked to utilise the rubric and highlight the areas of this that the draft project met, and provide information on how they think the group could better meet the assessment criteria. This had dual benefits: by providing scaffolded feedback, the students were able to engage in constructive review of project that differed from their own, gaining insight into a different method of multivariate analysis. Additionally, by applying the rubric directly in the feedback process, the students needed to read and understand the rubric in more depth, which assisted them in better meeting the assessment criteria in their own projects.
Feedback from students:
"I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed the alternative activity we did in SGS10 instead of the group project presentation. The peer-review process was super helpful to us understanding our own project and gave us a taste of what other groups were doing. We still practiced our communication skills, but also benefited from much more focused constructive criticism from our peers specific to our project reports. Having clear, targeted marking criteria with set standards for different grades also helped us understand what an appropriate standard was to achieve for the projects." 2nd year medical student (2023)
"Just wanted to say thank you very much for the amendment that was made to the BGDB group project this term. There were some things I found extremely helpful, and I wanted to share them with you.
- The choice of a peer marking based on transparent assessment criteria instead of a group project presentation was extremely helpful. It allowed us to receive real-time feedback and understand and help our peers on their project.
- The release of a transparent assessment criteria helped direct our writing process and make more productive use of our time
- The assessment criteria also made it more obvious as to what the requirements were, especially since most of us were unclear on the purpose of the assessment
Thanks for changing the project to help us better understand our chosen statistical analysis, while learning to write a peer review." 2nd year medical student (2023)
"I loved the way Jess structured her classes. I especially loved the how she organised a peer–review exercise instead of project presentations for SGS 10. I think it was a lot better than the presentations because it forced us to actively engage in reviewing each other's projects. I prefer it as well because it reduces the effort of having to make a presentation as well. I would absolutely love if this became the standard or at least an option for all group project presentations in the future." myExperience feedback, BGDB 2023
"Great that peers gave each other feedback on Assessment criteria for Group Project. Really helped to reflect on our own project and foster and encourage support of peers to each other." myExperience feedback, BGDB 2023
"I loved how Jess tailored the QMP BGDB project requirements to our learning abilities and needs. The implementation of a peer review process based on transparent marking criteria greatly helped us in the editing process and in better understanding the project requirements, something that most of us struggled with initially." myExperience feedback, BGDB 2023