Attendance: Drs. Cooper, Duckworth, Karle, Kellner, Novak, Rarey, Ritz, Stevens Students- Liz Lee, Penny Thomas Staff-, Marie Coleman (recording)

Dr. Rarey gave an update on the Curriculum Committee meeting that took place, October 25. Dr. Ritz gave an update at the Curriculum Committee meeting concerning competency scoring. The Curriculum Committee discussed having a required number of C grades for courses and clerkships. Dr. Rarey noted that several clerkships do give C’s. Dr. Ritz said that in comparison a D in a course is comparable to a C in a clerkship. Dr. Kellner said that the clerkship director who attends the Curriculum Committee meeting should be there to represent all clerkships not just theirs. Ms. Cooper wants to make sure it is fair to students. Dr. Kellner responded that that is why there is a need for criterion competencies.

Dr. Rarey asked Ms. Karle for her synopsis of the Family Medicine, Spring 2005, course syllabus. Ms. Karle stated that overall the syllabus and written report were well prepared as reflected by the reviewer’s scores. Ms. Karle noted that there was a discrepancy in the rankings on section I.A. Dr. Rarey moved to accept the report, but to review the syllabus using the computer/projector at the next meeting.

Dr. Rarey gave his synopsis of the Medicine Clerkship report. Dr. Rarey said that the section on feedback was scored rather low. The syllabus scored a 3. The syllabus does not contain an overview and the objectives were ranked low. This is an area that can use improvement. As to feedback, six point objectives were mentioned but not listed. The syllabus needs clarity.

Dr. Rarey gave his synopsis of the Essential Patient Care IV report. Dr. Rarey stated that EPC IV has a good on-site syllabus. The committee agrees that the evaluation of student performance area needs to be improved. Dr. Rarey suggested that the committee identify and list methods of evaluation for the students and pass them on to the course director. Dr. Rarey suggested that the committee review the syllabi for the courses-clerkships via on-screen projection at the next meeting. Ms. Cooper suggested that because of the scores that the course director should be invited in to the meeting so that their scores can be discussed with the raters. The committee agreed.

Dr. Rarey asked Dr. Stevens to give his synopsis of the Psychiatry Clerkship. Dr. Stevens first noted the length of the syllabus being 57 pages. Even though the syllabus was rated as a 4.0, the required items were difficult to find. Dr. Kellner added that it may be a good idea to add another point to rank the clarity of the syllabus. Based on the questions asked everything is in the syllabus, but finding the items is very difficult. Dr. Stevens stated that section II/E.F. was middle of the road, “just descriptive as opposed to reflective.”

Dr. Rarey asked Dr. Stevens to give his synopsis of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Clerkship. Section I/B is below the overall mean for the clerkship. Objectives need to be more in line with the six point objectives. Overall the syllabus and report are very good. Dr. Novak suggested using this clerkship as a model for a standardized syllabus and written report. The committee agreed unanimously.

Dr. Duckworth asked if a clerkship has a good report, does that mean it is a good clerkship. Overall opinion of the committee is that yes, if the report is good then the clerkship is good. The reason for this is that the report is based on information from all sources. A course director can say their course is good but if that does not mesh with the student’s evaluation, the committee should recognize there is a problem.

Dr. Rarey asked Dr. Stevens to give his synopsis of the Clinical Diagnosis Clerkship. Dr. Stevens stated that overall the report is good. There were some discrepancies between the scoring and the narrative comments.

The Evaluation Subcommittee meeting on November 9 will be moved to November 16.

Meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m.