Can peer feedback substitute for faculty feedback in predoctoral dental education?

Abstract

Purpose/objectives: The ability to give and receive feedback is a key skill to develop during predoctoral dental education, and the use of peer feedback specifically offers distinct benefits including a different understanding of material due to peers' proximity of knowledge development and assisting with overburdened instructors. However, it is unclear if peer feedback offers similar quality to instructor feedback.

Methods: Dental students in two different graduation years provided quantitative and qualitative peer feedback on a case-based oral and maxillofacial pathology simulation. The data from these exercises were aggregated and analyzed to compare the quality of qualitative feedback to course examination scores. Student perceptions of peer feedback were also recorded.

Results: The mean quality of feedback was not correlated with course examination scores, though the number of times students gave high-quality feedback and received high-quality feedback was correlated with course examination scores. Student feedback overall had a lower quality than instructor feedback, though there was no significant difference between instructor feedback quality and the maximum student feedback quality received. Student perceptions of the utility of feedback were positive.

Conclusion: While instructor feedback is more reliable and consistent, our findings suggest that in most instances, at least one peer in moderate-sized groups is able to approximate the quality of instructor feedback on case-based assignments.

Keywords: assessment; cognition; curriculum development/evaluation; educational measurement; educational methodology; peer feedback; rubric; small group evaluation; teaching methods; undergraduate dental.