现象:随着本科医学教育前阶段通过/失败分级做法的激增,出现关于评分和等级报告实践的透明度和可变性的问题,在评估中提出公平问题,特别是关于居住匹配。这项调查的目的是确定美国(U.S.)同种疗法医学院在其课程的实习前阶段的补救和学业成绩报告做法。方法:经过广泛的文献检索和课程院长和学习专家的反馈,我们制定了一项调查,该调查于2022年春季发送给美国所有154所认可的对抗疗法医学院的教前课程官员.它涉及课程内容和结构;文员前补救(例如,课程重考)和报告(例如,成绩单表示法的持久性)实践;非学术能力的文档和报告;以及参与者关于报告的意见和建议,透明度,和公平。我们生成了描述性统计数据,并显示了开放式响应的编码。研究结果:我们的应答率为40%(62/155),超过71%的人表示主要是基于器官系统的课程。视情况而定,对于单道和多道失败有广泛的补救方法,包括辅导或学习支持,重新考试,并转介给晋升委员会。专业关注是向居民总监报告的首要任务,在报告补救活动时,受访者的意见和做法存在显著差异。受访者担心公平,在灵活的评级做法和报告做法的透明度方面。见解:学校报告实践的可变性,在允许整体和个性化的学术支持方法的同时,也会造成潜在的不平等。需要做更多的工作来了解不同机构的不同报告做法如何在准备工作的不同阶段使边缘化和少数族裔学生群体处于不利地位。
Phenomenon: With the proliferation of pass/fail grading practices in the pre-clerkship phase of undergraduate medical education, questions arise about the transparency and variability of grading and grade reporting practices, raising issues of equity in assessment, particularly regarding residency matching. The purpose of this survey was to determine the
remediation and academic performance reporting practices of United States (U.S.) allopathic medical schools in the pre-clerkship phase of their curricula. Approach: After an extensive literature search and feedback from curriculum deans and learning experts, we developed a survey that we sent in the Spring of 2022 to pre-clerkship curriculum officials at all 154 accredited U.S. allopathic medical schools. It addressed curriculum content and structure; pre-clerkship
remediation (e.g., course retakes) and reporting (e.g., permanency of transcript notation) practices; documentation and reporting of nonacademic competencies; and participant opinions and recommendations regarding reporting, transparency, and equity. We generated descriptive statistics and did manifest coding of open-ended responses. Findings: We had a response rate of 40% (62/155), with over 71% indicating mainly organ systems-based curricula. Depending on the situation, there were a wide range of
remediation approaches for single- and multiple-course failures, including tutoring or learning support, re-exams, and referrals to a promotion board. Professionalism concerns were a top priority to report to residency directors, with significant variability in respondent opinions and practices in reporting remedial activities. Respondents were concerned about equity, both in terms of flexible grading practices and transparency of reporting practices. Insights: The variability in reporting practices across schools, while allowing holistic and individualized approaches to academic support, also creates potential inequities. More work is needed to understand how different reporting practices across institutions may disadvantage marginalized and minoritized student groups at different points in their preparation.