Improving selection procedures in health professions education from the applicant perspective: an interview study.

INTRODUCTION: Applicant perceptions of selection impact motivation and performance during selection, and student diversity. However, in-depth insight into which values underly these perceptions is lacking, creating challenges for aligning selection procedures with applicant perceptions. This qualitative interview study aimed to identify values applicants believe should underlie selection, and how, according to applicants, these values should be used to make specific improvements to selection procedures in undergraduate health professions education (HPE). METHODS: Thirty-one applicants to five undergraduate HPE programs in the Netherlands participated in semi-structured interviews using Appreciative Inquiry, an approach that focuses on what goes well to create vision for improvement, to guide the interviews. Transcriptions were analyzed using thematic analysis, adopting a constructivist approach. RESULTS: Applicants' values related to the aims of selection, the content of selection, and the treatment of applicants. Applicants believed that selection procedures should aim to identify students who best fit the training and profession, and generate diverse student populations to fulfill societal needs. According to applicants, the content of selection should be relevant for the curriculum and profession, assess a comprehensive set of attributes, be of high quality, allow applicants to show who they are, and be adapted to applicants' current developmental state. Regarding treatment, applicants believed that selection should be a two-way process that fosters reflection on study choice, be transparent about what applicants can expect, safeguard applicants' well-being, treat all applicants equally, and employ an equitable approach by taking personal circumstances into account. Applicants mentioned specific improvements regarding each value. DISCUSSION: Applicants' values offer novel insights into what they consider important preconditions for the design of selection procedures. Their suggested improvements can support selection committees in better meeting applicants' needs.

Selection tools and student diversity in health professions education: a multi-site study.

Student diversity in health professions education (HPE) can be affected by selection procedures. Little is known about how different selection tools impact student diversity across programs using different combinations of traditional and broadened selection criteria. The present multi-site study examined the chances in selection of subgroups of applicants to HPE undergraduate programs with distinctive selection procedures, and their performance on corresponding selection tools. Probability of selection of subgroups (based on gender, migration background, prior education, parental education) of applicants (N = 1935) to five selection procedures of corresponding Dutch HPE undergraduate programs was estimated using multilevel logistic regression. Multilevel linear regression was used to analyze performance on four tools: prior-education grade point average (pe-GPA), biomedical knowledge test, curriculum-sampling test, and curriculum vitae (CV). First-generation Western immigrants and applicants with a foreign education background were significantly less likely to be selected than applicants without a migration background and with pre-university education. These effects did not vary across programs. More variability in effects was found between different selection tools. Compared to women, men performed significantly poorer on CVs, while they had higher scores on biomedical knowledge tests. Applicants with a non-Western migration background scored lower on curriculum-sampling tests. First-generation Western immigrants had lower CV-scores. First-generation university applicants had significantly lower pe-GPAs. There was a variety in effects for applicants with different alternative forms of prior education. For curriculum-sampling tests and CVs, effects varied across programs. Our findings highlight the need for continuous evaluation, identifying best practices within existing tools, and applying alternative tools.

The added value of free preparatory activities for widening access to medical education: a multi-cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools are reported to be less accessible to students with non-traditional backgrounds. These students face barriers when applying for and transitioning to medical school, which may be reduced by offering free preparatory activities. By equalizing access to resources, these activities are expected to reduce disparities in selection outcomes and early academic performance. In the present study, four free institutionally-provided preparatory activities were evaluated by comparing the demographic composition of participating and non-participating applicants. Additionally, the association between participation and selection outcomes and early academic performance was investigated for subgroups (based on sex, migration background and parental education). METHODS: Participants were applicants to a Dutch medical school in 2016-2019 (N = 3592). Free preparatory activities included Summer School (N = 595), Coaching Day (N = 1794), Pre-Academic Program (N = 217), and Junior Med School (N = 81), supplemented with data on participation in commercial coaching (N = 65). Demographic compositions of participants and non-participants were compared using chi-squared tests. Regression analyses were performed to compare selection outcomes (curriculum vitae [CV], selection test score, probability of enrolment) and early academic performance (first-course grade) between participants and non-participants of demographic subgroups, controlling for pre-university grades and participation in other activities. RESULTS: Generally, no differences in sociodemographic compositions of participants and non-participants were found, but males participated less often in Summer School and Coaching Day. Applicants with a non-Western background participated less often in commercial coaching, but the overall participation rate was low and participation had negligible effects on selection outcomes. Participation in Summer School and Coaching Day were stronger related with selection outcomes. In some cases, this association was even stronger for males and candidates with a migration background. After controlling for pre-university grades, none of the preparatory activities were positively associated with early academic performance. CONCLUSIONS: Free institutionally-provided preparatory activities may contribute to student diversity in medical education, because usage was similar across sociodemographic subgroups, and participation was positively associated with selection outcomes of underrepresented and non-traditional students. However, since participation was not associated with early academic performance, adjustments to activities and/or curricula are needed to ensure inclusion and retention after selection.