Purpose: The meaning assessors attach to assessment criteria during clinical placement is under-researched. While personal beliefs, values or expectations may influence judgements, there is scant evidence of how this manifests in a clinical attachment setting. This research explored the concept and source of internalised standards and how these may influence judgements. Methods: This study, within the constructivist paradigm, was informed by the principles of grounded theory. Seven radiation therapists, purposefully selected, were interviewed face-to-face using semi-structured interviews. The sample size allowed for the gathering of sufficient data for in-depth thematic analysis, using the functionality of CAQDAS (NVivo 9). Results: Radiation therapists' judgements when assessing students were influenced by their previous experience. They had different expectations of the appropriate standard for each criterion on students' assessment forms - relating to technical ability, clinical knowledge and attitude. They had their own set of values, or expectations which informed 'internalised standards' which influenced their judgements about student performance. Prior experience - as students and as qualified professionals - influenced these decisions. Conclusion: Assessment of students' performance may differ depending on the clinician conducting the assessment. Even where assessors are given the same criteria and training, this does not ensure reliability, as judgements are influenced by their internalised standards. This has implications for the design of more appropriate assessor training which recognises and addresses this phenomenon. These results will be of interest to radiation therapists, radiographers, medical educators, allied health professionals and any academic or professional body with responsibility for ensuring that we qualify competent practitioners. © 2015 The College of Radiographers.
Author Keywords
Index Keywords
