The Performance Evaluation of Occupational Therapy Students (PEOTS) is an instrument designed to evaluate the clinical competence of occupational therapy students. The purpose of this study was to carry out a preliminary evaluation of the inter-rater and test-retest reliability of the PEOTS. Thirteen occupational therapy students, completed a one week placement at one of four facilities. Two occupational therapists supervised each student and evaluated performance using the PEOTS on day three and day five of this placement. The results indicated that the instrument has good inter-rater reliability. Test-retest reliability was difficult to evaluate since learning was a confounding factor. These preliminary findings support the use of the PEOTS as an evaluation tool. Further research, however, is needed to establish test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the PEOTS.
AdamsG. R.SchvaneveldtJ. D. (1985). Understanding research methods. New York: Longman.
2.
AsherI. E. (1989). An annotated index of occupational therapy evaluation tools. Rockvill, MD: The American Occupational Therapy Association.
3.
BerkR.A. (1979). Generalizability of behavioural observations: A clarification of interobserver agreement and interobserver reliability. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 83 (5), 460–472.
4.
BridleM.J. (1981). Profile of an occupational therapist revisited. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 48, 107–113.
5.
Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. (1980). Occupational Therapist Occupational Profile. Toronto, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
6.
DeMersJ.L. (1978). Observational assessment of performance. In MorganM. K.IrbyD. M. (Eds.), Evaluating clinical competence in the health professions. (pp 89–115). St. Louis, MO: C.V. Mosby.
7.
ErnestM. (1985). A comprehensive field placement evaluation instrument: History, development and implications. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 25–29.
8.
ErnestM. (1988). Occupational therapy practice: Generic or domain specific?Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55, 249–254.
9.
ErnestM.PolatajkoH. (1982). Performance Evaluation of Occupational Therapy Students. Unpublished instrument. University of Western Ontario.
10.
ErnestM.PolatajkoH. (1986). Performance evaluation of occupational therapy students: A validity study. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 53, 265–271.
11.
ErnestM.PolatajkoH.BossersA. (1990). Performance Evaluation of Occupational Therapy Students, Revised. Unpublished instrument. University of Western Ontario.
12.
KernB.MickelsonJ. (1971). The development and use of an evaluation instrument for clinical education. Physical Therapy, 51, 540–546.
13.
LawM. (1987). Measurement in occupational therapy: Scientific criteria for evaluation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54, 133–138.
14.
LoomisJ. (1985). Evaluating clinical competence of physical therapy students. Part 2: Assessing the reliability, validity and usability of a new instrument. Physiotherapy Canada, 37, 91–98.
15.
MatuscakR. (1983). Criteria, purposes, and methods for evaluating the clinical competence of students in the llied health professions. Journal of Allied Health, May, 85–94.
16.
MissiunaC.PolatajkoH.Ernest-ConibearM. (1992). Skill acquisition during fieldwork placements in occupational therapy. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 28–39.
17.
MorganM., & IrbyD. (Eds.). (1978). Evaluating clinical competence in the health professions. St. Louis, MO: C.V. Mosby.
18.
OysterC.HantenW.LlorensL. (1987). Introduction to research: A guide for the health science professional. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott.
19.
PophamW. J. (1990) Modern educational measurement: A practitioner's perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.
SalviaJ.YsseldykeJ. (1988). Assessment in special and remedial education (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
21.
SaxG. (1989). Principles of educational and psychological measurement and evaluation (3rd. Ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
22.
SinopoliL. M.BlockA. S. (1978). Respiratory therapy: Application of an evaluation model. In MorganM. K.IrbyD. M. (Eds.), Evaluating clinical competence in the health professions (pp 233–243). St. Louis, MO: C.V. Mosby.
23.
SpectorP.E. (1981). Research designs: Quantitative applications in the social sciences. London, England: Sage Publications.
24.
TowerJ.VosburghP. (1976). Development of a rating scale to measure learning in clinical dietetics. Journal of The American Dietetic Association, 68, 440–445.
