Evaluation of marking of peer marking in oral presentation.

BACKGROUND: Peer marking is an important skill for students, helping them to understand the process of learning and assessment. This method is increasingly used in medical education, particularly in formative assessment. However, the use of peer marking in summative assessment is not widely adopted because many teachers are concerned about biased marking by students of their peers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether marking of summative peer assessment can improve the reliability of peer marking. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, the peer-marking results of a summative assessment of oral presentations of two cohorts of students were compared. One group of students was told that their peer marks would be assessed against a benchmark consisting of the average of examiner marks and that these scores together with the peer and examiner marks would form their final exam results. The other group of students were just informed that their final exam results would be determined based on the examiner and peer marks. RESULTS: Based on examiner marks, both groups of students performed similarly in their summative assessment, agreement between student markers was less consistent and more polar than the examiners. When compared with the examiners, students who were told that their peer marking would be scored were more generous markers (their average peer mark was 2.4 % points higher than the average examiner mark) while students who were not being scored on their marking were rather harsh markers (their average peer mark was 4.2 % points lower than the average examiner mark), with scoring of the top-performing students most affected. CONCLUSIONS: Marking of peer marking had a small effect on the marking conduct of students in summative assessment of oral presentation but possibly indicated a more balanced marking performance

Dlk1 Is Necessary for Proper Skeletal Muscle Development and Regeneration

Delta-like 1homolog (Dlk1) is an imprinted gene encoding a transmembrane protein whose increased expression has been associated with muscle hypertrophy in animal models. However, the mechanisms by which Dlk1 regulates skeletal muscle plasticity remain unknown. Here we combine conditional gene knockout and over-expression analyses to investigate the role of Dlk1 in mouse muscle development, regeneration and myogenic stem cells (satellite cells). Genetic ablation of Dlk1 in the myogenic lineage resulted in reduced body weight and skeletal muscle mass due to reductions in myofiber numbers and myosin heavy chain IIB gene expression. In addition, muscle-specific Dlk1 ablation led to postnatal growth retardation and impaired muscle regeneration, associated with augmented myogenic inhibitory signaling mediated by NF-κB and inflammatory cytokines. To examine the role of Dlk1 in satellite cells, we analyzed the proliferation, self-renewal and differentiation of satellite cells cultured on their native host myofibers. We showed that ablation of Dlk1 inhibits the expression of the myogenic regulatory transcription factor MyoD, and facilitated the self-renewal of activated satellite cells. Conversely, Dlk1 over-expression inhibited the proliferation and enhanced differentiation of cultured myoblasts. As Dlk1 is expressed at low levels in satellite cells but its expression rapidly increases upon myogenic differentiation in vitro and in regenerating muscles in vivo, our results suggest a model in which Dlk1 expressed by nascent or regenerating myofibers non-cell autonomously promotes the differentiation of their neighbor satellite cells and therefore leads to muscle hypertrophy

Reliability and validity of student peer assessment in medical education: a systematic review

Background: Peer assessment has been demonstrated to be an effective educational intervention for health science students.\ud \ud Aims: This study aims to give an overview of all instruments or questionnaires for peer assessments used in medical and allied health professional educational settings and their psychometric characteristics as described in literature.\ud \ud Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out using the electronic databases Pubmed, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science, including all available inclusion dates up to May 2010.\ud \ud Results: Out of 2899 hits, 28 studies were included, describing 22 different instruments for peer assessment in mainly medical educational settings. Although most studies considered professional behaviour as a main subject of assessment and described peer assessment usually as an assessment tool, great diversity was found in educational settings and application of peer assessment, dimensions or constructs as well as number of items and scoring system per questionnaire, and in psychometric characteristics.\ud \ud Conclusions: Although quite a few instruments of peer assessment have been identified, many questionnaires did not provide sufficient psychometric data. Still, the final choice of an instrument for educational purposes can only be justified by its sufficient reliability and validity as well as the discriminative and evaluative purposes of the assessment