Cheever Todd R, Norman Candy A, Nora Lois M
University of Kentucky, College of Medicine, Lexington 40536, USA.
Acad Med. 2002 Nov;77(11):1174-5. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200211000-00045.
Previous work has identified that medical students experience instances of gender discrimination and sexual harassment during the residency selection process (i.e., "audition" elective rotations, residency interviews, and career counseling).(1,2) Examples of such instances include male students who report being counseled away from obstetrics-gynecology and a female student who reported being asked about her sexual orientation because of an expressed interest in breast disease. Students also report confusion about what constitutes an appropriate question or inappropriate gender-related comments. A common example is questioning about plans for child care during residency. We developed an education intervention focused on gender- and family-related issues that may arise during the residency selection process in an attempt to improve our students' ability to (1) recognize appropriate and inappropriate questions and situations and (2) handle such situations in a professional manner.
Our educational intervention is a voluntary, intense, active learning situation composed of four parts. First, data outlining the problem-including personal stories of students-are presented. Second, a faculty member with dual experience as a residency training director and dean for student affairs presents examples of appropriate and inappropriate questions (both types of questions can be uncomfortable if not contemplated in advance), potential ways to approach these questions, and a thoughtful approach for the student to take when integrating his or her experiences during the residency selection process with ultimate decisions about career and ranked programs. During the third part of the workshop, students draw two cases of 15 potential situations from a hat. They work in pairs, first to identify whether the case outlines an appropriate or inappropriate situation and second to develop and practice their responses. The session concludes with open discussion about the various scenarios and responses.
This workshop has been well received by our medical students. In post-workshop surveys, students universally reported that the session was useful. Ninety percent of attendees felt better able to recognize appropriate and inappropriate questions and situations during the residency selection process. Seventy-seven percent of students reported that they felt better able to handle inappropriate situations during the residency selection process in a professional manner. Student comments reflected great satisfaction with the interactive nature of the exercise, interest in expanding the amount of time dedicated to the workshop, and a desire for clear rules about what can/cannot be said. Faculty offering the workshop reported satisfaction doing the workshop and noted that the greatest challenge in presenting the material is balancing the discussion about reasonable responses to inappropriate behaviors with the students' interest in performing well on all interviews in order to maximize their options. Interest in the program has resulted in the authors' being invited to share the workshop at an upcoming GME retreat for the institution's program directors. Based on these results we plan to continue the workshop in an expanded version. In addition, we plan to use this format of the workshop as a springboard for similar sessions for medical students interested in confronting issues of discrimination and harassment in the educational setting.
先前的研究发现,医学生在住院医师选拔过程中(即“试听”选修轮转、住院医师面试和职业咨询)会遭遇性别歧视和性骚扰事件。(1,2)此类事件的例子包括,有男学生称被建议不要选择妇产科专业,还有一名女学生称因表达了对乳腺疾病的兴趣而被问及性取向。学生们还表示,对于什么是合适的问题或不恰当的性别相关评论感到困惑。一个常见的例子是在住院医师培训期间被问及育儿计划。我们开展了一项针对住院医师选拔过程中可能出现的性别和家庭相关问题的教育干预措施,旨在提高我们学生的能力:(1)识别合适与不合适的问题及情况;(2)以专业的方式处理此类情况。
我们的教育干预措施是一种由四个部分组成的自愿、高强度、主动学习的情境。首先,展示概述问题的数据,包括学生的个人经历。其次,一位兼具住院医师培训主任和学生事务院长双重经验的教员会给出合适与不合适问题的示例(如果事先没有考虑过,这两类问题都可能令人不舒服)、处理这些问题的潜在方式,以及学生在将住院医师选拔过程中的经历与最终的职业和排名项目决策相结合时应采取的周全方法。在工作坊的第三部分,学生们从帽子里抽取两个包含15种潜在情况的案例。他们两人一组,首先确定案例描述的是合适还是不合适的情况,其次制定并练习他们的应对方式。会议以对各种场景和应对方式的公开讨论结束。
这个工作坊受到了我们医学生的好评。在工作坊后的调查中,学生们普遍表示该课程很有用。90%的参与者认为自己在住院医师选拔过程中能更好地识别合适与不合适的问题及情况。77%的学生表示他们觉得自己在住院医师选拔过程中能更专业地处理不合适的情况。学生们的评论反映出他们对练习的互动性非常满意,希望增加工作坊的时长,并且希望有关于能说什么/不能说什么的明确规则。提供该工作坊的教员表示对开展这个工作坊很满意,并指出在讲解材料时最大的挑战是在讨论对不当行为的合理应对方式与学生在所有面试中表现出色以最大化选择机会的兴趣之间取得平衡。对该项目的兴趣促使作者受邀在即将到来的机构项目主任研究生医学教育务虚会上分享这个工作坊。基于这些结果,我们计划继续开展这个工作坊的扩展版本。此外,我们计划以这种工作坊形式为契机,为有兴趣应对教育环境中歧视和骚扰问题的医学生举办类似的课程。