Evaluation role of tutors: comparison of perception students of the Health Careers

Evaluación del rol del tutor: comparación de percepción de estudiantes de las carreras de la salud
Nancy Navarro H.a, y José Zamora S.b

a Departamento Obstetricia y Ginecología, Oficina de Educación en Ciencias de la Salud, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile
b Oficina de Educación en Ciencias de la Salud, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile

Recibido el 17 de octubre de 2016; aceptado el 27 de enero de 2017

Palabras Clave

Educación, Médica, Empatía, Médicos, Prueba psicológica, Precisión de las mediciones dimensionales


Education, Medical, Empathy, Physicians, Psychological test, Dimensional measurement accuracy


Objective: To compare the performance of tutors in different curricular levels of Health Careers, from the student perspective.

Method: Descriptive cross-sectional quantitative research was carried out. The population corresponded to students of Nursing, Kinesiology, Medicine, Nutrition, Obstetrics, Medical Technology, with experience in PBL of different curricular levels. A questionaire of 23-ítems, grouped into three factors: tutor tasks; methodological domain / attitudinal aspect; learning environment (α Cronbach 0.91), was applied to 1.541 students with prior informed consent. A Likert scale (1 to 5) was used for the responses. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed, comparison of means with Scheffe’s test.

Results: In factor I, items with lower means are concentrated in all curricular levels: It stimulates self-evaluation and peer evaluation of students; Helps develop individual communication skills in students. In factor II the item with lower mean was demonstrates responsibility in tutorial process and greater; demonstrates commitment in its role of tutor. The factor III corresponds to the best evaluated of the instrument, the greater means were stimulates the good relations between students; It manages to create an atmosphere of trust and respect in the tutorial. Factor I has a significant difference (p < 0.05) between first level and clinical (p.002), the factor II between the first and preclinical levels (p.002); first level and clinical (p .000). Factor III shows differences between first level and clinical (p.000) and preclinical and clinical (p .027).

Conclusions: The greatest difficulty for tutors is related to evaluative processes, the least complex is related to the favorable learning environment generated in the methodology. Students of higher levels value the tutors with expertise in methodology and discipline. Teacher training should be targeted according to student development stages and peer reflection spaces.