38
PRESENTED BY- NEETHU LIZA JOSE MS c NURSING Ist YEAR APOLLO COLLEGE OF NURSING

Presentation on rating scales

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Presentation on rating scales

PRESENTED BY-

NEETHU LIZA JOSE

MS c NURSING Ist YEAR

APOLLO COLLEGE OF NURSING

Page 2: Presentation on rating scales
Page 3: Presentation on rating scales

Rating scale is an

important technique of

evaluation. Rating is the

assessments of a person

by another person. This is

one of the oldest methods

of personality assessment.

There are certain general

approaches to assess

personality like holistic or

overall approach,

projective test approach

and trait approach. In this

rating scales and

inventories come under

the trait approach.

Page 4: Presentation on rating scales

PIONTS OF RATING SCALE:

• Three point scale

Above average / Average / Below average

• Five point scale

Excellent / Very good / Good / Average / Poor

Page 5: Presentation on rating scales

3-

POINT

RATIN

G

SCALE

Page 6: Presentation on rating scales

5-POINT RATING SCALE

Page 7: Presentation on rating scales

DESCRIPTIVE RATING SCALE

NUMERICAL RATING SCALE

GRAPHICAL RATING SCALE

COMPARATIVE RATING SCALE

Page 8: Presentation on rating scales

DESCRIPTIVE

RATING SCALE

IN THIS DESCRIPTIVE TERMS OR PHRASES ARE ASSIGNED TO EACH TRAIL.THE RATER ENTERS THE APPROPRIATE PHRASES AFTER EACH NAME TO INDICATE JUDGEMENT OF THE PERSON.

Page 9: Presentation on rating scales

NUMERICAL RATING SCALE

In which numbers are

assigned to each trait.

If it is a seven point

scale, the number 7

represents the

maximum amount of

that trait in the

individual, and 4

represents the average.

The rater merely enters

the appropriate

number after each

name to indicate

judgment of the person.

Page 10: Presentation on rating scales

ACTIVITY:

HOW FAR DO YOU UNDERSTAND SUBJECTS IN NURSING?

Page 11: Presentation on rating scales

GRAPHIC

RATING SCALE

A straight line,

may be

represented by

descriptive

phrases at various

points. To rate

the subject for a

particular trait a

check mark is

made at the

particular point.

Page 12: Presentation on rating scales

COMPARATIVE RATING SCALE

• IN THIS PERSON MAKES AJUDGEMENT ABOUT AN ATTIRE/ATTITUDE/OBJECT....... BY COMPARING IT WITH OTHERS/RANKING IT.

Page 13: Presentation on rating scales
Page 14: Presentation on rating scales
Page 15: Presentation on rating scales
Page 16: Presentation on rating scales

CHARACTERISTICS OF RATING SCALE:

• 1. These are value judgements about attributes of one person by another person.

• 2.These are most commonly used tools to carry out structured observations.

• 3. These are generally developed to make qualitative judgement about qualitative attributes.

• 4. Provide more flexibility to judge the level of performance.

Page 17: Presentation on rating scales

PRINCIPLES OF RATING SCALES:

IT RELATES TO LEARNING OBJECTIVE.

NEEDS TO BE CONFINED TO PERFORMANCE AREAS

THAT CAN BE OBSERVED.

CLEARLY DEFINES MODE OF BEHAVIOUR.

THE BEHAVIOUR SHOULD BE READILY OBSERVED

IN A NUMBER OF SITUATIONS.

ALLOW SOME SPACE IN THE RATING SCALE FOR

THE RATER TO GIVE SUPPLEMENTARY REMARKS.

3 TO 7 RATING POSITIONS MAY BE PROVIDED.

ALL RATERS SHOULD BE ORIENTED TO THE

SPECIFIC SCALE AS WELL AS THE PROCESS OF

RATING IN GENERAL.

Page 18: Presentation on rating scales

CONT......

The Rater Should Be Unbiased And Trained.

Consider Evaluation Setting, Feedback And Student Participation.

Have Experts And Well Informed Raters.

Change The Ends Of Scale So That Good Is Not Always At The Top Or Bottom.

Assure That Rater Autonomy Will Be Maintained.

Page 19: Presentation on rating scales

ADVANTAGES:• EASY TO ADMINISTER AND SCORE.

• ITS EASY TO MAKE AND LESS TIME CONSUMING.

• EASILY USED FOR LARGE GROUP.

• ALSO USED FOR QUANTITATIVE METHODS.

• MAY ALSO BE USED FOR ASSESSMENT OF INTEREST, ATTITUDE, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS.

• USED TO EVALUATE PERFORMANCE AND SKILLS.

Page 20: Presentation on rating scales

DISADVANTAGES:

• DIFFICULT TO FIX UP RATING.

• CHANCES FOR SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION,

THUS THE SCALES MAY BECOME

UNSCIENTIFIC.

Page 21: Presentation on rating scales

CHECKLIST

Page 22: Presentation on rating scales

CONSTRUCTION OF CHECKLIST:

1. EXPRESS EACH ITEM IN CLEAR

,SIMPLE LANGUAGE.

2. AN INTENSIVE SURVEY IS MADE TO

DETERMINE THE TYPE OF

CHECKLIST TO BE MADE.

3. THE LIST OF ITEMS IN CHECKLIST

MAY BE CONTINOUS OR DIVIDE

INTO GROUPS OF RELATED ITEMS.

4. AVOID NEGATIVE STATEMENTS.

5. AVOID LIFTING STATEMENTS.

6. ENSURE EACH ITEM HAS CLEAR

RESPONSES:

YES OR NO, TRUE OR FALSE

7. REVIEW THE ITEM REPEATEDLY.

8. CHECLIST MUST HAVE THE

QUALITY OF COMPLETENESS AND

COMPREHENSIVENESS.

Page 23: Presentation on rating scales
Page 24: Presentation on rating scales

OBJECTIVE STRUCTURED CLINICAL/PRACTICAL EXAMINATION(OSCE)

Page 25: Presentation on rating scales

HISTORY OF OSCE.....

OSCE Was Developed In Dundae, Scotland In The

Early 1970’s.

Introduced By Dr. Harden And Colleagues In 1975.

• OSCE is A form of performance based testing

used to measure candidates clinical competence.

During an OSCE, candidates are observed and

evaluated as they go through A series of station in

which they interview , examine and treat

standardised patients who present with some type

of medical problem.

Page 26: Presentation on rating scales

CHARACTERISTICS OF OSCE

• It is an assessment approach primarily

used to measure clinical competence.

• Should be planned or structured

(predetermined clinical competences)

• Examination format or framework

• Different types of test method can be

incorporated into it.

Page 27: Presentation on rating scales

OSCE (CONT...)

• In most stations students are observed

(by one or more examiners)

• Scored as they carry out the task or

interpret clinical materials (e.g.

laboratory data, X-rays), write notes

or answer question

Page 28: Presentation on rating scales

OBJECTIVE(O):

• ‘O’ In the word stands for ‘objective and objectivity’ is a defining feature of this type of assessment.

• All candidates are assessed using exactly the same station, with same marking scheme. In an OSCE, candidates get marks for each step that they perform correctly, which therefore makes the assessment of clinical skills more objective rather than subjective which is where the examiners decide on whether or not the candidate fails based on the subjective assessment of their skills.

Page 29: Presentation on rating scales

STRUCTURE (S):

• To achieve objectivity in the assessment of competency, a clinical skill or procedure is typically broken down into component parts in very structured way.

• Stations in OSCE have very specific task where simulated patients are used, detailed scripts are provided, a specific task is given to complete. Each skill of student will be examined by lecture ,and this skill is broken down into component parts and marking criteria is made in form of checklist.

Page 30: Presentation on rating scales

CLINICAL(C):• CLINICAL EXAMINATION: The OSCE Is designed

to have both clinical and theoretical knowledge.

When theoretical is required only standardized

questions are asked. Sometimes when performing

clinical skill in practise setting, it is not unusual to be

interrupted by what else is happening. But clinical

skills are fundamental to nursing practise. therefore,

to overcome these issues simulation is commonly

used for OSCE in order to create an environment

similar to that of clinical setting.

• E.g.: A model of skin can be used to enable the

student demonstrate how to give IM Injection.

Page 31: Presentation on rating scales

EXAMINATION(E):

• In OSCE, clinical competency is assessed by breaking it down to various components. In this way students are required to demonstrate not only ‘what they know’ but also they know ‘howto perform’ a clinical skill.

Page 32: Presentation on rating scales

EXAM VENUE:

Page 33: Presentation on rating scales

CHANGING STATIONS:

Page 34: Presentation on rating scales

TREATING PATIENT:

Page 35: Presentation on rating scales
Page 36: Presentation on rating scales
Page 37: Presentation on rating scales
Page 38: Presentation on rating scales