We agree with the majority of leaders in dental education that evaluation of graduates by independent third parties is appropriate, as referenced in our article,1 but not for the reasons in Dr. Yeager’s letter. While anecdotal observations have value, the difficulty with accepting them as a basis for evaluating the performance of clinical licensing examinations is that they are the lowest level of evidence.2 Our argument for research was not for investigating the value of portfolios in all evaluations, but specifically for evaluating their reliability, validity and fairness in the specific instance of clinical licensing examinations, in comparison with those values of other testing methods, including the current model of one-time clinical observation. Thus, a much higher level of evidence for a preferred method could be obtained than is now available.
Although we know of no compiled reports in that regard, we expect that all, or nearly all, dental schools do use a variety of portfolios, formally or informally, for a number of purposes, including teaching, learning and assessment. We did not infer that schools use inadequate tools, merely that we knew of little published evidence of the reliability and validity of portfolios as used specifically in the dental educational setting, other than the one we cited.3
The questions we provided in the article were to illustrate those that we think should be addressed in research, specifically as to the applicability of portfolios in dental licensing examinations.
TOP
REFERENCES
