Faculty Development Office

Faculty of Medicine, McGillUniversity

Evaluating Medical Students - Suggested Readings

REFERENCE & ABSTRACT #1

Journal:Academic Medicine, November 2002, 77(11), 1096-1100

Title:Should MedicalSchool Faculty See Assessments of Students Made by Previous Teachers?

Authors: W.L. Gold, P. McArdle and D.D. Federman

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to: Dr. Gold, Division of General Internal Medicine and Division of Infectious Diseases, Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth Street, ENG-248, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4, Canada; telephone: (416) 340-4410; fax (416) 595-5826; E-mail: .

Abstract:

Whether medical school faculty should be provided with assessmentsof students made by previous teachers remains controversial.To document which schools have implemented policies that addressthis issue and to characterize the specific features of thesepolicies, in 1998 the authors conducted a direct mail surveyof deans of student affairs and medical education at 144 medicalschools in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. Replies were received from 129 (90%) of the 144 medical schools.Of those schools, 72 (56%) reported having policies that addressthis issue. The policies permit the sharing of information in38 (53%) of the 72 schools that had policies; therefore, atthe time of this study, 29% of the 129 medical schools thatresponded to the survey had a policy that permits the sharingof assessment information. The policies permit the sharing ofinformation related to problems with academic performance (35%),professional conduct (35%), physical health (25%), and miscellaneouscircumstances, such as learning disability (5%). Informationmay be shared with clerkship coordinators (44%), course directors(35%), faculty mentors (11%), clinical faculty supervisors (8%),and resident supervisors (3%). The findings show that there is considerable diversity in theformat and content of policies that address the issue of whethermedical school faculty should be provided with information aboutstudents' assessments made by previous teachers. The authorsexplain why policies that require the provision of such informationare helpful to medical school faculty, and offer recommendationsbased on the survey findings.

REFERENCE & ABSTRACT #2

Journal:Academic Medicine, December 1991, 66(12), 762-769.

Title:A Review of the Validity and Accuracy of Self-assessments in Health Professions Training

Author:M.J. Gordon

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to: Dr. Gordon, Department of Family Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle 98195.

Abstract:

Valid self-assessment is fundamental to continuing professional competencebut is seldom explicitly taught in health professions training. This reviewanalyzed 18 scholarly articles published between January 1970 and February1990 (14 articles regarding health professions trainees, and fourconcerning college students or graduate trainees) in which it was possibleto compare performance as self- assessed by trainees with performance asassessed by experts or objective tests. The validity of self-assessedperformance was found to be low to moderate and did not improve with timein conventional health professions training programs. Self-assessedperformance seemed closely related to generalized self-attributions and wasminimally influenced by external feedback in the form of test scores,grades, or faculty assessments. In five programs emphasizing explicitself-assessment goals and training strategies, moderate-to-high validityoutcomes or improvements over time were demonstrated. Much of what passesfor self- assessment in training seems the exercise of an underdevelopedskill, but effective training to improve validity and accuracy is available and feasible.

REFERENCE & ABSTRACT #3

Journal:Academic Medicine, September 1999, 74(9), 980-990.

Title:A Strategy for the Detection and Evaluation of Unprofessional Behavior in Medical Students.

Authors:M.A. Papadakis, E.H. Osborn, M. Cooke and K. Healy

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to: Dr. Papadakis, University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine, 94143, USA; telephone: (415) 476-1217; fax: (415) 502-1320; E-mail: .

Abstract:

The authors describe the first four years (1995-1998) in which theUniversity of California, San Francisco School of Medicine operated anevaluation system to monitor students' professional behaviorslongitudinally through their clinical rotations. The goals of this systemare to help "turn around" students found to have behaved unprofessionally,to demonstrate the priority placed by the school on the attainment ofprofessional behavior, and to give the school "muscle" to deal with issuesof professionalism. A student whose professional skills are rated less thansolid at the end of the clerkship receives a "physicianship report" ofunprofessional behavior. If the student receives such a report from two ormore clerkships, he or she is placed on academic probation that can lead todismissal even if passing grades are attained in all rotations. Counselingservices and mentoring by faculty are provided to such students to improvetheir professional behaviors. From 1995 to 1998, 29 reports ofunprofessional behavior on the part of 24 students were submitted to thedean's office; five students received two reports. The clerkship thatsubmitted the most reports was obstetrics-gynecology. The most commoncomplaint for the five students who received two reports was a poorrelationship with the health care team. Four of these students had theirdifficulties cited in their dean's letters and went on to residency; thefifth voluntarily withdrew from medical school. The authors describe thestudents' and faculty members' responses to the system, discus lessonslearned, difficulties, and continuing issues, review future plans (e.g.,the system will be expanded to the first two years of medical school), andreflect on dealing with issues of professionalism in medical school and theimportance of a longitudinal (i.e., not course-by-course) approach tomonitoring students' behaviors. The authors plan to compare the long-rangeperformances of students identified by the evaluation system with those oftheir classmates.