Evaluation Of Agreement Between Peer and Faculty Assessments in Preclinical Endodontic Education: A Pilot Study

Objectives: This pilot study aimed to evaluate the agreement between peer and faculty assessments of dentistry students' performance in a preclinical endodontics practical course. Materials and Methods: Data were collected from second-year dentistry students enrolled in the preclinical endodontics practical course at XXXXX University. Participation in the study was voluntary. Following a theoretical explanation of the endodontic access cavity course by the course coordinator, a demonstration was conducted on preparing endodontic access cavities in both upper and lower premolars. The scoring rubric was then explained to the students in detail. Students were then asked to evaluate their peers' performances anonymously based on the endodontic access cavities prepared during the course. After the peer evaluations, a faculty member graded the students' performances using the same scoring scale. The agreement between peer and faculty evaluations was analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests, with a significance level set at 0.05. Results: A significant difference was found between peer and faculty scores for access cavities opened in upper and lower premolars (P < 0.05). Faculty evaluation scores were significantly lower than those given by peers. The most common error found by peers was the access cavities being opened too small, whereas the most frequent mistake identified by faculty members was failing to completely remove the pulp chamber roof or horn. Conclusion: Peer evaluation skills in dentistry students can improve through practical training and feedback, aligning them more closely with faculty evaluations. This helps ensure that graduates have the knowledge and skills needed for endodontic procedures.