Justin L Bullock1, Cindy J Lai, Tai Lockspeiser, Patricia S O'Sullivan, Paul Aronowitz, Deborah Dellmore, Cha-Chi Fung, Christopher Knight, Karen E Hauer. 1. J.L. Bullock is a first-year resident in internal medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. The author was a fourth-year medical student at the time of writing. C.J. Lai is director of internal medicine clerkships and professor, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. T. Lockspeiser is director of the assessment/competency committee and associate professor, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado. P.S. O'Sullivan is director of research and development in medical education and professor, Department of Medicine and Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California. P. Aronowitz is clerkship director of internal medicine and professor, Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis School of Medicine, Davis, California. D. Dellmore is director of medical student education and associate professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico. C.-C. Fung is assistant dean for medical education and associate professor, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, California. C. Knight is associate clerkship director and associate professor, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. K.E. Hauer is associate dean for competency assessment and professional standards and professor, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, San Francisco, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine medical students' perceptions of the fairness and accuracy of core clerkship assessment, the clerkship learning environment, and contributors to students' achievement. METHOD: Fourth-year medical students at 6 institutions completed a survey in 2018 assessing perceptions of the fairness and accuracy of clerkship evaluation and grading, the learning environment including clerkship goal structures (mastery- or performance-oriented), racial/ethnic stereotype threat, and student performance (honors earned). Factor analysis of 5-point Likert items (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) provided scale scores of perceptions. Using multivariable regression, investigators examined predictors of honors earned. Qualitative content analysis of responses to an open-ended question yielded students' recommendations to improve clerkship grading. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 71.1% (666/937). Students believed that being liked and particular supervisors most influenced final grades. Only 44.4% agreed that grading was fair. Students felt the clerkship learning environment promoted both mastery and performance avoidance behaviors (88.0% and 85.6%, respectively). Students from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine were more likely to experience stereotype threat vulnerability (55.7% vs 10.9%, P < .0005). Honors earned was positively associated with perceived accuracy of grading and interest in competitive specialties while negatively associated with stereotype threat. Students recommended strategies to improve clerkship grading: eliminating honors, training evaluators, and rewarding improvement on clerkships. CONCLUSIONS: Participants had concerns around the fairness and accuracy of clerkship evaluation and grading and potential bias. Students expressed a need to redefine the culture of assessment on core clerkships to create more favorable learning environments for all students.
PURPOSE: To examine medical students' perceptions of the fairness and accuracy of core clerkship assessment, the clerkship learning environment, and contributors to students' achievement. METHOD: Fourth-year medical students at 6 institutions completed a survey in 2018 assessing perceptions of the fairness and accuracy of clerkship evaluation and grading, the learning environment including clerkship goal structures (mastery- or performance-oriented), racial/ethnic stereotype threat, and student performance (honors earned). Factor analysis of 5-point Likert items (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) provided scale scores of perceptions. Using multivariable regression, investigators examined predictors of honors earned. Qualitative content analysis of responses to an open-ended question yielded students' recommendations to improve clerkship grading. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 71.1% (666/937). Students believed that being liked and particular supervisors most influenced final grades. Only 44.4% agreed that grading was fair. Students felt the clerkship learning environment promoted both mastery and performance avoidance behaviors (88.0% and 85.6%, respectively). Students from backgrounds underrepresented in medicine were more likely to experience stereotype threat vulnerability (55.7% vs 10.9%, P < .0005). Honors earned was positively associated with perceived accuracy of grading and interest in competitive specialties while negatively associated with stereotype threat. Students recommended strategies to improve clerkship grading: eliminating honors, training evaluators, and rewarding improvement on clerkships. CONCLUSIONS:Participants had concerns around the fairness and accuracy of clerkship evaluation and grading and potential bias. Students expressed a need to redefine the culture of assessment on core clerkships to create more favorable learning environments for all students.
Authors: Sarang Kim; Liesel Copeland; Elizabeth Cohen; James Galt; Carol A Terregino; Archana Pradhan Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 6.473