Evaluation Subcommittee Meeting - January 15, 1997

Present:

Alguire, Duerson, Duff, Lucas, Okun, Rooks, Stevens, Small, Suter, Watson, Webb

Absent:

Romrell, VanSusteren

The meetings through March will be held at 7:30 AM in room CG-78 on the following Wednesdays: 1/29, 2/12, 2/26, 3/12, 3/26.

Watson urged the Committee to proceed as expeditiously as possible with the development of a comprehensive evaluation system that includes the assessment of student, faculty, and course/clerkship performance. In particular, course and faculty evaluations are needed for implementing the mission-based budgeting system. Consideration of quality of teaching plays an important role in the allocation of funds to raise the base-level salary (20th AAMC percentile) to the 50th AAMC percentile.

The following discussion together with Pat Alguire's explanation of his proposed student evaluation matrix led to important consensus and raised many questions that require exploration:

1. Whenever possible, and most certainly toward the end of the students' careers, evaluations must be competency based and comprehensive, i.e., assess performance including all three skills domains (cognitive, psychomotor, attitudinal) in realistic settings. At the conclusion of each year, student progress should be assessed by progressively more complex competency-based examinations.
2. The pros and cons of a pass-fail system with extensive feedback through the first two years with student ranking being predominantly based on a total professional assessment in the fourth year were weighed without conclusion.
3. The use of an evaluation matrix as proposed by Pat Alguire seemed very attractive. The coordinates of the matrix are the competencies on the horizontal dimension, as developed by the Curriculum Committee, and appropriate methodologies on the vertical dimension. It should be relatively easy to develop similar matrices for faculty and course/clerkship evaluations.
4. The evaluation system must be in tune with the emerging performance-based curriculum. It should be based on the fourth year competencies as applied to the clinical presentations, from which enabling objectives are derived as guides for faculty instruction, student learning, and evaluations throughout the four years.
5. Should annual comprehensive evaluations be implemented, cooperation between basic scientists and clinicians is essential to benefit from their full potential.
6. As immediate next steps, an overview document will be prepared (Rooks, Small, Suter), and matrices for faculty, course/clerkship, and program evaluations will be developed.

Please remember the meeting of Wednesday, 1/29 at 7:30 AM in Room CG-78.