|
What Physician Competence is Assessed Well by Patient Surveys of Medical Residents?
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Sue Hamann,
Coastal Area Health Education Center,
sue.hamann@coastalahec.org
|
| Jason Eudy,
Coastal Area Health Education Center,
jason.eudy@coastalahec.org
|
| Abstract:
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires graduate medical (residency) training programs to evaluate the achievement of specific educational goals. The ACGME identified six areas of competence in which medical residents are to be proficient by the end of their graduate training: patient care, medical knowledge, practice-based learning and improvement, interpersonal and communication skills, professionalism, and systems-based practice. For three years, we have collected patient data about resident performance presumed to be relevant to the competencies of interpersonal and communication skills and professionalism. Multiple assessment methods were employed, including individually administered inpatient and outpatient surveys, mailed surveys, and standardized patient surveys. Moreover, extensive interviews of nurses and graduate medical education faculty addressed these same competencies. Reliability, validity, and utility of these assessments will be described.
|
|
Evaluation and Learning: Experiential Learning in Medical School Training
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Summers Kalishman,
University of New Mexico,
skalish@salud.unm.edu
|
| Jan Mines,
University of New Mexico,
jmines@salud.unm.edu
|
| Lisa Serna,
University of New Mexico,
lserna@salud.unm.edu
|
| Renee Quintana,
University of New Mexico,
requintana@salud.unm.edu
|
| Roger Jerabek,
University of New Mexico,
rjerabek@salud.unm.edu
|
| Phil Szydlowski,
University of New Mexico,
pszydlowski@salud.unm.edu
|
| Abstract:
This paper triangulates evidence from multiple methods to validate experiential learning settings in medical education. Our medical school curriculum is based on six competencies, which are 1) Medical Knowledge, 2) Patient Care, 3) Practice-based Learning, 4) Professionalism and Ethics, 5) Interpersonal and Communication Skills, and 6) Systems-and Community-based Practice. Experiential, case-based or hands-on learning as well as one-on-one teaching with guided practice constitute venues that best address the six competencies of the Accreditation Commission on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME). These venues and competencies frame our medical school curriculum and provide learners with opportunities for contextual practice and feedback. In these settings, students report that they are able to 1) integrate conceptual and practical spheres of knowledge, 2) observe different physician preceptors and receive guidance, and 3) engage in active learning.
|
|
Learning From Résumé-Analysis: A Tool to Analyze Career Pathways and Evaluate Training Programs of National Institutes of Health (NIH) Funded Alumni
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Susan Tucker,
Evaluation and Development Association,
sutucker@sutucker.cnc.net
|
| Raymond Ivatt,
Evaluation and Development Association,
ray.ivatt@wat-if.com
|
| Simeon Slovacek,
California State University,
sslovac@exchange.calstatela.edu
|
| Jackie Stillisano,
Texas A&M University,
jstillisano@coe.tamu.edu
|
| Abstract:
Our interest in knowledge value and the potential of résumés or CVs as an evaluation resource, stems from a general interest in assessing the impacts of federally financed training projects whose goal is to increase the number of minority doctoral researchers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). Our study addresses the impact of this investment, namely, the research productivity after these students have completed what are sometimes very lengthy and circuitous paths to the doctorate. The purpose of this paper is to assess the utility of Bozeman and Dietz's (2000) CV-based methodology within the context of three of NIH's most successful Minority Opportunities in Research (MORE) projects for preparing biomedical researchers. To test the utility of using CVs to study the career pathways of MORE alumni, three data collection approaches were used: searching NIH and NSF databases; Internet search; and sampling 100 doctoral alumni CVs from the three MORE projects.
|
| | |