Evaluating Your Medical Education Gretchen Guiton Director of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Evaluating Your Medical Education

Gretchen Guiton Director of Evaluation Jennifer Gong Assistant Director of Evaluation Susan Claxon Evaluation Specialist Susan Peth Evaluation Specialist

August 2012 – CO 2016

Purpose of Presentation

Describe the evaluation system, procedures, and policies Explain your role in the evaluation process

Goal of Evaluation

Examine the process and impact of educational experiences on students, faculty and the institution. To this end, the Evaluation Office supports the identification, collection, reporting and interpretation of information to aid in the improvement of undergraduate medical education including that required for accreditation.

Evaluations …

Assess quality of curriculum components

 block or course content, faculty teaching, impact on your attitudes, behaviors, learning

Are administered online through-out course

• r end of block, may involve focus groups to
• btain in-depth information

Your Feedback is Confidential

Information provided can be linked to person providing it Only members of Evaluation Office can view link We use link to monitor quality of feedback Evaluations may be “resent” to improve quality

Evaluations are Required

 Because your feedback is critical to the on-going monitoring, improvement, and accreditation of the educational program, the Curriculum Steering Committee has made participation in the evaluation system mandatory.  Evidence suggests that failure to complete evaluations in medical school is indicative of future professionalism problems in medical school* and in practice.**

*Stern, D.P., M, The Developing Physician — Becoming a Professional. New England Journal of Medicine, 2006 **Papadakis, et al. Disciplinary Action by Medical Boards and Prior Behavior in Medical School. New England Journal of Medicine, 2006 .

Policy on Com pleting Evaluations

.

Failure to complete an evaluation in the designated time frame results in referral to the Professionalism Committee. Procedure -- Evaluation Office notifies the Associate

Dean who

1. Will discuss issue with you on first occasion

• 2. Will file Professionalism Form with Committee on second occasion
• 3. Will result in a second Professionalism Form being filed and likely

review by Committee for repeated instances of unprofessional behavior

• n the third occasion

Evaluation Process

Evaluations allow completion in “real time” -- open Saturday for prior week All evaluations close on the same day To reduce burden, class is randomly divided into 2 groups to complete either Block or Longitudinal course evaluations

ALL STUDENTS

Longitudinal Courses Evaluate

Foundations of Doctoring Threads MSA

Essential Core Block Evaluate

Lecturers Sm all Group Facilitators Block Overall

Evaluate PBL Com plete Other Questionnaires Random ized into 2 groups

ALL STUDENTS

Longitudinal Courses Evaluate

Foundations of Doctoring Threads MSA

Essential Core Block Evaluate

Lecturers Sm all Group Facilitators Block Overall

Evaluate PBL Com plete Other Questionnaires Random ized into 2 groups

Evaluation Release & Closure

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Aug 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sept 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Oct. 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 23 24 25 26 27 28 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Nov. 28 29 30 31 1 2

Em ail Notice of Evaluation

Num ber of Em ails per Week

If you are in the Essential Core group, you’ll get one email notification every week If you are in the Longitudinal/ Foundations Group, you’ll get two email notifications every week. You will need to “click in” to two different lists of pending evaluations in

• rder to get all your assigned evaluations.

Course Evaluation

Lecturer Evaluation

Facilitator Evaluation

Save vs. Submit

Suspending an Evaluation

Mobile Access

OPTION #1: From your email, click link. OPTION #2: Log-in to E*Value directly.  Sign in using Logger username & password.  Select “Program” (Essential Core, Foundations, Longitudinal)  Go to Pending Evaluations and complete

Select your “program ”

Click on “Evaluations” Icon

Select “Pending”

Your “Pending Evals”

What is “good feedback”?

 Appropriate scope and tone  Specific  Describes observable behaviors  Objective  Modifiable  Timely  Selective  Suggests ways to improve/ Reinforces positive

Example 1

“I w ish there w a s m ore clinica l em p ha sis in block.”

Criteria for Good Feedback:  Appropriate scope and tone  Specific  Describes observable behaviors  Objective  Modifiable  Timely  Selective  Suggests ways to improve/ Reinforces positive behavior

Improved by asking Where & What

Where should the “clinical emphasis” be?

 In exam questions  Integrated better into lectures  Within a specific topic area (embryology of X, anatomy of Y)  All areas (Be selective!)

Example 2

“Dissection la bs help im m ensely .”

Criteria for Good Feedback:  Appropriate scope and tone  Specific  Describes observable behaviors  Objective  Modifiable  Timely  Selective  Suggests ways to improve/ Reinforces positive behavior

Improved by asking How

How did “dissection labs” help your learning?

 Aid to retaining content  Ability to have questions from lecture answered in small group setting  Connected theoretical with real  Faculty showed interest in my learning

Example 3

“La rge group ca ses.”

Criteria for Good Feedback:  Appropriate scope and tone  Specific  Describes observable behaviors  Objective  Modifiable  Timely  Selective  Suggests ways to improve/ Reinforces positive behavior

Improved by asking What & How

 What was beneficial (or not)?

 The large group format  The “cases”

 How did it support your learning (or not)?

Making a Suggestion

“Replace Dr. X as a lecturer.”

VS. “The single lecture I had the most trouble with was X. I found the notes hard to follow, and the lecture did not clarify ideas for me. I think the lecture would be much more effective if the notes were organized to be friendlier to the novice – really explain the basic concepts before throwing in the detail.”

Issues of Tone

• Dr. Z, you …
• Rock.
• Suck.
• Should never be allowed near a medical

student.

Sharing Opinion or Experience?

Waste of paper w ith so m any slides. Vs. I found the handouts lengthy, and having so m any slides m ade it hard for m e to identify the key concepts.

Contact Us!

 Susan Claxon  Susan Peth  Jennifer Gong  Gretchen Guiton

 Evaluation Email:

SOM.Evaluations@ucdenver.edu

 Evaluation Website:

https:/ / ucdenver.edu/ som/ edr/ evaluation