OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether students' performance evaluations by faculty were influenced by the clinical service on which the student was evaluated. METHODS: Third-year medical students spent 8 weeks rotating on 3 (or 2) surgical services. Typically, students rotate on one 4-week general surgery service and two 2-week subspecialty services. Faculty members rated student performance on 5 characteristics and provided a numeric grade. Data were analyzed to determine whether any significant variations in evaluation patterns emerged. RESULTS: A total of 1033 evaluations were included in the analyses. Based on an analysis of variance, the numeric grade varied significantly by service (p < 0.001). The partial eta squared statistic was large (0.21). Ratings of students' performance on specific performance characteristics also varied significantly by service (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of a surgical student's clinical performance is influenced by the specific services on which he/she has rotated and may be related to the length of the rotation. Research is needed to determine whether the differences among services should be considered as a source of error in grading or considered to reflect the particular challenge of the service. Copyright (c) 2010 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether students' performance evaluations by faculty were influenced by the clinical service on which the student was evaluated. METHODS: Third-year medical students spent 8 weeks rotating on 3 (or 2) surgical services. Typically, students rotate on one 4-week general surgery service and two 2-week subspecialty services. Faculty members rated student performance on 5 characteristics and provided a numeric grade. Data were analyzed to determine whether any significant variations in evaluation patterns emerged. RESULTS: A total of 1033 evaluations were included in the analyses. Based on an analysis of variance, the numeric grade varied significantly by service (p < 0.001). The partial eta squared statistic was large (0.21). Ratings of students' performance on specific performance characteristics also varied significantly by service (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of a surgical student's clinical performance is influenced by the specific services on which he/she has rotated and may be related to the length of the rotation. Research is needed to determine whether the differences among services should be considered as a source of error in grading or considered to reflect the particular challenge of the service. Copyright (c) 2010 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.