Literature DB >> 22914517

Modified personal interviews: resurrecting reliable personal interviews for admissions?

Mark D Hanson1, Kulamakan Mahan Kulasegaram, Nicole N Woods, Lindsey Fechtig, Geoff Anderson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Traditional admissions personal interviews provide flexible faculty-student interactions but are plagued by low inter-interview reliability. Axelson and Kreiter (2009) retrospectively showed that multiple independent sampling (MIS) may improve reliability of personal interviews; thus, the authors incorporated MIS into the admissions process for medical students applying to the University of Toronto's Leadership Education and Development Program (LEAD). They examined the reliability and resource demands of this modified personal interview (MPI) format.
METHOD: In 2010-2011, LEAD candidates submitted written applications, which were used to screen for participation in the MPI process. Selected candidates completed four brief (10-12 minutes) independent MPIs each with a different interviewer. The authors blueprinted MPI questions to (i.e., aligned them with) leadership attributes, and interviewers assessed candidates' eligibility on a five-point Likert-type scale. The authors analyzed inter-interview reliability using the generalizability theory.
RESULTS: Sixteen candidates submitted applications; 10 proceeded to the MPI stage. Reliability of the written application components was 0.75. The MPI process had overall inter-interview reliability of 0.79. Correlation between the written application and MPI scores was 0.49. A decision study showed acceptable reliability of 0.74 with only three MPIs scored using one global rating. Furthermore, a traditional admissions interview format would take 66% more time than the MPI format.
CONCLUSIONS: The MPI format, used during the LEAD admissions process, achieved high reliability with minimal faculty resources. The MPI format's reliability and effective resource use were possible through MIS and employment of expert interviewers. MPIs may be useful for other admissions tasks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22914517     DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318267630f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   6.893


  6 in total

1.  Improving reliability of a residency interview process.

Authors:  Michael J Peeters; Michelle L Serres; Todd E Gundrum
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2013-10-14       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  Clinical assessment of transthoracic echocardiography skills: a generalizability study.

Authors:  Dorte Guldbrand Nielsen; Signe Lichtenstein Jensen; Lotte O'Neill
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 2.463

3.  Multiple independent sampling within medical school admission interviewing: an "intermediate approach".

Authors:  Mark D Hanson; Nicole N Woods; Maria Athina Martimianakis; Raj Rasasingham; Kulamakan Kulasegaram
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2016-10

4.  Adapting the Admissions Interview During COVID-19: A Comparison of In-Person and Video-Based Interview Validity Evidence.

Authors:  Kulamakan Kulasegaram; Victorina Baxan; Elicia Giannone; David Latter; Mark D Hanson
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 7.840

Review 5.  A meta-analytic perspective on the valid use of subjective human judgement to make medical school admission decisions.

Authors:  Clare Kreiter; Marie O'Shea; Catherine Bruen; Paul Murphy; Teresa Pawlikowska
Journal:  Med Educ Online       Date:  2018-12

6.  A critical perspective on the modified personal interview.

Authors:  Dilshan Pieris
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2019-02
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.