Exploring approaches to dietetic assessment of a common task across different universities through assessment moderation

Background: Assessment presents one of the greatest challenges to evaluating

health professional trainee performance, as a result of the subjectivity of

judgements and variability in assessor standards. The present study aimed

to test a moderation procedure for assessment across four independent universities

and explore approaches to assessment and the factors that influence

assessment decisions.

Methods: Assessment tasks designed independently by each of the four universities

to assess student readiness for placement were chosen for the present

study. Each university provided four student performance recordings

for moderation. Eight different academic assessors viewed the student performances

and assessed them using the corresponding university assessment

instrument. Assessment results were collated and presented back to the

assessors, together with the original university assessment results. Results

were discussed with assessors to explore variations. The discussion was

recorded, transcribed, thematically analysed and presented back to all assessors

to achieve consensus on the emerging major learnings.

Results: Although there were differences in absolute scores, there was consistency

(12 out of 16 performances) in overall judgement decisions regarding

placement readiness. Proficient communication skills were considered a

key factor when determining placement readiness. The discussion revealed:

(i) assessment instruments; (ii) assessor factors; and (iii) the subjectivity of

judgement as the major factors influencing assessment.

Conclusions: Assessment moderation is a useful method for improving the

quality of assessment decisions by sharing understanding and aligning standards

of performance.