Assessing competencies of trainee sport psychologists: An examination of the ‘structured case presentation’ assessment method |
| |
| Institution: | 1. University of Tasmania, School of Education, Launceston, Australia;2. School of Human Kinetics, Laurentian University, Canada;1. Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Belgium;2. Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium;1. Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education, McGill University, Canada;2. Department of Psychology, Concordia University, Canada;3. Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Canada;4. College of Kinesiology, University of Saskatchewan, Canada;5. Department of Kinesiology, Brock University, Canada;1. School of Human Kinetics, Laurentian University, Canada;2. Hong Kong Sport Institute, Hong Kong;3. Psychology School, Beijing Sport University, China;4. Institute of Sport Psychology and Sport Pedagogy, Leipzig University, Germany;5. College of Physical Activity and Sport Sciences, West Virginia University, United States;6. School of Sport, Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, United Kingdom;7. Division of Research & Innovation, University of Southern Queensland, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesThere is virtually no literature on how to assess competencies of applied sport psychologists. We assessed casework of applied sport psychology students and compared written case report assessment (WCRA) with structured case presentation assessment (SCPA) on reliability and acceptability (e.g., validity, transparency, feedback function and preference of methods, as perceived by students and assessors).DesignA quantitative, comparative study of two assessment methods.MethodParticipants were 11 students, nine supervisors and three exam committee members. A number of 18 cases were evaluated with both WCRA by the supervisor and SCPA by two exam committee members. Ten of these cases were also evaluated with WCRA by exam committee members. Interrater reliability measures were calculated and compared for the different assessment methods. Participants' perception of the validity, transparency, and feedback function of the methods, and the preferences for assessment methods were surveyed with a brief questionnaire.ResultsSCPA by the exam committee resulted in higher interrater reliability than WCRA by supervisor and exam committee. The feedback function of SCPA seemed superior to WCRA by either supervisor or exam committee. For assessment by the exam committee, the perceived validity and transparency of SCPA seemed higher than of WCRA. Students and exam committee had the highest preference for SCPA by supervisor and exam committee.ConclusionsOverall it can be concluded that, for assessment by the exam committee, structured case presentations provided a more reliable and acceptable method of assessment than written case reports only. |
| |
| Keywords: | Assessment Competency Structured case presentation |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
