A discussion ensued on the template for the clerkship and basic science courses. An email inquiry was sent out about what course/clerkship directors used in the past and there was very little response. There seems to be no uniformity in evaluation of the courses/clerkships. There is a core set of questions for the faculty but not for the clerkships themselves. In the past we have asked for a summative statement but there has been a lot of variation. We need to define what we want.
Dr. Kellner reported that he spent many hours redoing, changing the format, and inserting new information into the ob/gyn clerkship report. Most of the format he thought could be generic. He indicated he would submit the report some time today. He doesn't feel we evaluate the students properly and feels there is a need to develop descriptive criteria. The majority of committee members felt also that the faculty evaluation of students needs improvement.
Dr. Rarey indicated that we need to examine the ob/gyn template and to present it to the Curriculum Committee for approval. Also, he noted that we need to assess individual teaching being done by our colleagues and how effectively the teaching is being carried out.
Dr. Small stated that a down side would be a young clerkship director would need to be protected by his/her chair.
Dr. Romrell indicated there is a peer evaluation of faculty throughout the whole college.
Dr. Koroly found that there were inconsistencies in the student reports. She suggested that we have an outside person evaluate a course (for vertical/horizontal integration) for 2 or 3 lectures; look at handouts; discuss with faculty member teaching the course, and have conversation between faculty in different areas to help with feedback on how that faculty member teaches, and what he/she teaches. Then that reviewer could write a summary from actual observations. She mentioned that sometimes individual teachers change, but a majority of the time content stays the same.
While this seemed to be an excellent idea, it was viewed as a tremendous effort to have someone come in to "observe" a course. It would be a difficult, if nearly impossible, to pursue in the clinical setting, but could be done in the basic science setting. Some members of the group felt that it was too labor-intensive for faculty to do and they will ask "what's in it for me"? They felt that if it doesn't generate income, they will say "no."
Dr. Koroly was asked to work on a basic science course template for the next meeting and Dr. Kellner for the clinical science template. The group indicated that there has to be some sort of internal incentive.
Next meeting will be devoted to the review of prototypes for the clerkship report and basic science course report. The next meeting will be on November 12 in M112 at noon.