Table 3.
Defining dimensions, the salient features that distinguish categories of description from one another, and characteristics associated with, but may not be an integral feature of, conceptions of assessment
| Dimensions of conceptions of assessment |
| Purpose of assessment Includes (1) overall notions of assessment as either a concrete (practical) or a abstract (a tool to guide student learning) task; (2) how participants perceive its goal (administrative, psychometric and/or moral and social); (3) how it is used (summatively and/or formatively); (4) its resultant learning effects or outcomes (obtaining a grade, reproducing knowledge, developing competencies, impact on curriculum and health services); as well as (5) its horizon as local (a mark for a single student in a single course) or more global (a tool for student learning over a program and beyond) |
| Temporal perspective Related to the purpose of assessment; speaks to the practice and impact of assessment; ranging from short- (a single course or a “today” focus) to long-term (a program, lifetime or field; a “tomorrow” focus) |
| Role and responsibility Describe how participants saw themselves as assessors and clerkship assessment conveners (sense of ownership and involvement: a merely mechanistic operation or a thoughtful, intentional initiation): institutional administrator, disciplinary content-expert, educator (facilitator or learning guide, role model), leader |
| Accountability Who or what does assessment practice impact on and whose imperatives should be prioritised: the institution, profession and discipline, student (and program/curriculum) and/or the patient and society? |
| Reflexivity Metacognitive thinking around assessment. Passive or uncritical acceptance of practices; questioning or critical reflection of own assessment thinking and practices; basing their assessment thinking on assessment principles and theory/scholarship |
| Emotional valence The emotions associated with how participants expressed their views of assessment and its outcomes, ranging from negative to positive |
| Associated characteristics |
| Assessment literacy The level of technical assessment knowledge and understanding e.g., principles for quality assessment practice that participants implied or explicitly articulated; ranging from limited to developing to advancing to sophisticated |
| Professional identity Refers to how participants represented themselves professionally; such as solely a clinician, clinician-educator (tensions or conflicted vs. balanced or equal), educator or scholarly assessor |
| Self-efficacy The degree of confidence and competence participants believe they possess for practising assessment (designing, implementing, decision-making, etc.); ranging from low to high |