Methods: Iterative development of a clinical evaluation tool built on previous versions of the clinical evaluation tool used to assess student performance used objective descriptions for each competency category, as well as a numerical value. Preceptors almost universally assigned the highest score, despite the student not matching the objective description for each score. When the university moved to the Reporter, Interpreter, Manager, Educator (RIME) model for assessing student progress, the faculty incorporated the language for each RIME description into the evaluation tool and removed the numerical scores.
Results: Clinical evaluations revealed student performance assessments which more closely matched their performance in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) with standardized patients.
Conclusion: The methods used to evaluate student performance in a single clinical rotation and in the greater context of success in the program is an on-going process. Future efforts should focus on working with preceptors to uncover what is behind the grade inflation. Standardized, evidence-based tools for evaluation nurse practitioner student clinical progress assists faculty in identifying at-risk students and developing appropriate remediation.