Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Structures and Processes of Grading Committees in Internal Medicine Clerkships: Results of a National Survey.
Alexandraki, Irene; Osman, Nora; Ratcliffe, Temple; Simon, Wendy; McBee, Elexis; Kisielewski, Michael; Lai, Cindy J.
Afiliación
  • Alexandraki I; I. Alexandraki is professor of internal medicine and senior associate dean, academic affairs, University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix, Phoenix, Arizona.
  • Osman N; N. Osman is associate professor of medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
  • Ratcliffe T; T. Ratcliffe is associate professor of medicine, The Joe R. and Teresa Lozano Long School of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas.
  • Simon W; W. Simon is clinical professor of medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California.
  • McBee E; E. McBee is associate professor of medicine, Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland.
  • Kisielewski M; M. Kisielewski is assistant director of surveys and research, Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine, Alexandria, Virginia.
  • Lai CJ; C.J. Lai is professor and director of medical student clinical education, Department of Medicine, UCSF School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.
Acad Med ; 2024 Jul 25.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39079043
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Clerkship grades are important in the residency selection process but can be influenced by individual bias and grading tendencies. Although clinical competency committees are standard in graduate medical education, in undergraduate medical education, they have not gained widespread traction. This study describes structures and processes of grading committees in internal medicine (IM) clerkships and strategies used to mitigate grading bias.

METHOD:

From September to December 2022, the Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine conducted its annual survey of IM core clerkship directors at 140 U.S. and U.S. territory-based medical schools. This study was based on 23 questions about grading committees in IM clerkships.

RESULTS:

The survey response rate was 80% (n = 112/140). Forty-seven respondents (42%) reported using grading committees in their IM clerkship (median committee size, 7; range, 3-20) (primarily clerkship leadership and faculty). Responsibilities included determining grades for all students (31 [66%]) and students at borderline of failing (30 [64%]), adjudicating on students with professionalism concerns (25 [53%]), and reconciling discordant clinical evaluations (24 [51%]). To mitigate deliberation bias, committees most frequently used multisource assessments (38 [81%]) and adoption of a shared mental model (36 [77%]). Approximately one-third of grading committees "rarely" discussed gender (14 [30%]) and race or ethnicity (15 [32%]), and 7 committees (15%) "never" discussed gender and race or ethnicity. Clerkship directors perceived developing a shared mental model (60 [92%]), promoting consistency (59 [91%]) and transparency (57 [88%]) in the process, mitigating assessment bias (58 [89%]), improving student satisfaction (54 [83%]), and sharing grading responsibility (44 [68%]) as potential benefits.

CONCLUSIONS:

This study found that grading committees in IM clerkships are not widely used and that existing committees vary in structure and process. These findings highlight an opportunity for medical schools to consider using grading committees to improve grade assignment and address grading inconsistencies.

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Acad Med Asunto de la revista: EDUCACAO Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Acad Med Asunto de la revista: EDUCACAO Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article