Fazio Sara B, Torre Dario M, DeFer Thomas M
a Department of Medicine , Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center , Boston , Massachusetts , USA.
b Department of Medicine , University of Pittsburgh Medical Center , Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania , USA.
Teach Learn Med. 2016 Jul-Sep;28(3):286-92. doi: 10.1080/10401334.2016.1164605. Epub 2016 May 4.
Clerkship evaluation and grading practices vary widely between U.S. medical schools. Grade inflation continues to exist, and grade distribution is likely to be different among U.S. medical schools.
Increasing the number of available grades curtails "grade inflation."
A national survey of all Clerkship Directors in Internal Medicine members was administered in 2011. The authors assessed key aspects of grading.
Response rate was 76%. Among clerkship directors (CDs), 61% of respondents agreed that grade inflation existed in the internal medicine clerkship at their school, and 43% believed that it helped students obtain better residency positions. With respect to grading practices, 79% of CDs define specific behaviors needed to achieve each grade, and 36% specify an ideal grade distribution. In addition, 44% have a trained core faculty responsible for evaluating students, 35% describe formal grading meetings, and 39% use the Reporter-Interpreter-Manager-Educator (RIME) scheme. Grading scales were described as follows: 4% utilize a pass/fail system, 13% a 3-tier (e.g., Honors/Pass/Fail), 45% 4-tier, 35% 5-tier, and 4% 6+-tier system. There was a trend to higher grades with more tiers available.
Grade inflation continues in the internal medicine clerkship. Almost half of CDs feel that this practice assists students to obtain better residency positions. A minority of programs have a trained core faculty who are responsible for evaluation. About one third have formal grading meetings and use the RIME system; both have been associated with more robust and balanced grading practices. In particular, there is a wide variation between schools in the percentage of students who are awarded the highest grade, which has implications for residency applications. Downstream users of clinical clerkship grades must be fully aware of these variations in grading in order to appropriately judge medical student performance.
美国各医学院在实习评估和评分做法上差异很大。成绩通胀现象持续存在,且美国各医学院的成绩分布可能有所不同。
增加可用成绩等级的数量可减少“成绩通胀”。
2011年对内科实习主任协会的所有成员进行了全国性调查。作者评估了评分的关键方面。
回复率为76%。在内科实习主任中,61%的受访者同意其所在学校的内科实习存在成绩通胀现象,43%的人认为这有助于学生获得更好的住院医师职位。关于评分做法,79%的实习主任定义了获得每个成绩所需的具体行为,36%规定了理想的成绩分布。此外,44%有经过培训的核心教员负责评估学生,35%描述了正式的评分会议,39%使用报告者-口译员-管理者-教育者(RIME)方案。评分等级如下:4%采用及格/不及格系统,13%采用三级制(如优秀/及格/不及格),45%采用四级制,35%采用五级制,4%采用六级及以上制。随着可用等级的增加,有成绩提高的趋势。
内科实习中的成绩通胀现象仍在持续。近一半的实习主任认为这种做法有助于学生获得更好的住院医师职位。少数项目有经过培训的核心教员负责评估。约三分之一的项目有正式的评分会议并使用RIME系统;这两者都与更健全和平衡的评分做法相关。特别是,各学校在获得最高成绩的学生百分比方面差异很大,这对住院医师申请有影响。临床实习成绩的下游使用者必须充分了解这些评分差异,以便恰当地评判医学生的表现。