Table 2.

Selected competency assessment criteria

Sources: Low DS, Kalkwarf KL. Assessing continued competency: an approach for dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1996;127(3):383–8; Mossey PA, Newton JP, Stirrups DR. Defining, conferring and assessing the skills of the dentist. Br Dent J 1997;182(4):123–5; Hendricson WD, Kleffner JH. Curricular and instructional implications of competency-based dental education. J Dent Educ 1998;62(2):183–96; O’Connor P, Lorey RE. Improving inter-rater agreement in evaluation in dentistry by the use of comparison stimuli. J Dent Educ 1978;42(4):174–9; Berrong JM, Buchanan RN, Hendricson WD. Evaluation of practical clinical examinations. J Dent Educ 1983;47(10):656–63; Mackenzie RS, Antonson DE, Weldy PL, Welsch BB, Simpson WJ. Analysis of disagreement in the evaluation of clinical products. J Dent Educ 1982;46(5):284–9; Kerlingen FN. Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Reinhart, and Winston, 1966:516–7; Chambers DW, Boyarsky H, Peltier B, Fendler F. Development of a mission-focused faculty evaluation system. J Dent Educ 2003;67(1):10–22; McCann AL, Babler WJ, Cohen PA. Lessons learned from the competency-based curriculum initiative at Baylor College of Dentistry. J Dent Educ 1998;62(2):197–207; Yip H-K, Smales RJ. Review of competency-based education in dentistry. Br Dent J 2000;189(6):324–6; Yip H-K, Smales RJ, Newsome PRH, Chu FCS, Chow TW. Competency-based education in a clinical course in conservative dentistry. Br Dent J 2001;191(9):517–22.
  1. Assessments distinguish competent from incompetent practitioners.

  2. Assessments are valid and reliable.

  3. Assessments are applied uniformly.

  4. Assessments measure objective standards.

  5. Clear performance standards and criteria are formulated by the evaluators.

  6. Standards/criteria are understood and applied uniformly by every evaluator.

  7. Standards/criteria are reviewed and revised regularly under CQI feedback.

  8. Standards/criteria are fully available to those being assessed.

  9. Assessments focus on a defined scope of activities/procedures.

  10. Student remediation programs are available.

  11. Assessors are able to assess the standards/criteria with minimal variability.

  12. Students experience enhanced formative learning opportunities.