Hunt D D, MacLaren C F, Carline J
University of Washington School of Medicine (UWSM), Seattle 98195.
Acad Med. 1991 Jun;66(6):340-4. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199106000-00007.
The Association of American Medical Colleges' Committee on Dean's Letters advised in 1988 that the dean's letter should be a letter of evaluation rather than a letter of recommendation. The committee also recommended that the letter contain some form of comparative information to let the residency director know how individual students fared in comparison with their peers. This article reports the results of a 1989 study of the types of agreements between the letter writers and the residency directors of two schools. Three standard methods of providing comparative information were used in their ranking of 20 graduates from the class of 1987 at each school. Ordinal ranking from best to worst students revealed a surprisingly high degree of rank-order agreement, but only for 15 of the 16 participating residency directors. Clustering into fixed groups ("top third," etc.) gave high agreement for top students but weaker agreement for the middle and lower groupings. The advantages and disadvantages of these evaluation methods are discussed.
美国医学院协会院长推荐信委员会在1988年建议,院长推荐信应是一份评估信而非推荐信。该委员会还建议信中应包含某种形式的比较信息,以便住院医师培训项目主任了解个别学生与同龄人相比的表现。本文报告了1989年对两所学校的写信人(推荐人)与住院医师培训项目主任之间协议类型的研究结果。在对每所学校1987届的20名毕业生进行排名时,使用了三种提供比较信息的标准方法。从最好到最差对学生进行序数排名显示,排名顺序的一致性程度高得出奇,但16位参与的住院医师培训项目主任中只有15位是这样。聚类为固定组(“前三分之一”等)对优秀学生的一致性较高,但对中等和较低分组的一致性较弱。文中讨论了这些评估方法的优缺点。