An Examination of Grade Appeals via a Root Cause Analysis.

IF 5.3 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Academic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1097/ACM.0000000000006000
Samara B Ginzburg, Aubrie Swan Sein, Jonathan M Amiel, Lisa Auerbach, Todd Cassese, Lyuba Konopasek, Allison B Ludwig, Mimoza Meholli, Robin Ovitsh, Judith Brenner
{"title":"An Examination of Grade Appeals via a Root Cause Analysis.","authors":"Samara B Ginzburg, Aubrie Swan Sein, Jonathan M Amiel, Lisa Auerbach, Todd Cassese, Lyuba Konopasek, Allison B Ludwig, Mimoza Meholli, Robin Ovitsh, Judith Brenner","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000006000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Undergraduate medical educators seek to optimize student learning, improve grading transparency and fairness, and provide useful information to residency programs. Recently, the United States Medical Licensing Examination's shift to pass/fail scoring for Step 1 disrupted curricular and assessment operations, and schools' tiered grading practices have been scrutinized. In noting that significant institutional time and energy were being expended in addressing the current levels of student grade appeals, 6 public and private medical schools in the Northeastern United States engaged in an examination of grade appeals via a root cause analysis (RCA). From November 2021 to April 2022, the authors reviewed specific instances of grading challenges that the team of educators encountered previously. From May to June 2022, the authors met for a facilitated discussion of the question, \"Why are students challenging grading processes and systems or outcomes?\" From July to October 2022, the authors identified root causes by analyzing results from the fishbone diagram (process, equipment, materials, people, and environment) and using the \"five whys\" technique. Several potential explanations for grade appeals and challenging grading systems across institutions were identified, including variability in the quality or experience of evaluators, lack of clarity about the goals and expectations of clerkships and a lack of transparency about the grading process, having a tiered grading system, technical issues with equipment, and clinical productivity demands of faculty. In proposing solutions to root causes identified in the RCA, factors were mapped to Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) standards to facilitate quality and process improvements in grading. Aiming to support the learning environment and a fair and equivalent assessment process, the authors present a novel RCA and LCME method that can contribute to improving grading systems and has the potential to enhance learning and success.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000006000","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Undergraduate medical educators seek to optimize student learning, improve grading transparency and fairness, and provide useful information to residency programs. Recently, the United States Medical Licensing Examination's shift to pass/fail scoring for Step 1 disrupted curricular and assessment operations, and schools' tiered grading practices have been scrutinized. In noting that significant institutional time and energy were being expended in addressing the current levels of student grade appeals, 6 public and private medical schools in the Northeastern United States engaged in an examination of grade appeals via a root cause analysis (RCA). From November 2021 to April 2022, the authors reviewed specific instances of grading challenges that the team of educators encountered previously. From May to June 2022, the authors met for a facilitated discussion of the question, "Why are students challenging grading processes and systems or outcomes?" From July to October 2022, the authors identified root causes by analyzing results from the fishbone diagram (process, equipment, materials, people, and environment) and using the "five whys" technique. Several potential explanations for grade appeals and challenging grading systems across institutions were identified, including variability in the quality or experience of evaluators, lack of clarity about the goals and expectations of clerkships and a lack of transparency about the grading process, having a tiered grading system, technical issues with equipment, and clinical productivity demands of faculty. In proposing solutions to root causes identified in the RCA, factors were mapped to Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) standards to facilitate quality and process improvements in grading. Aiming to support the learning environment and a fair and equivalent assessment process, the authors present a novel RCA and LCME method that can contribute to improving grading systems and has the potential to enhance learning and success.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
摘要:本科医学教育工作者力求优化学生的学习,提高评分的透明度和公平性,并为住院医师培训项目提供有用的信息。最近,美国医学执业资格考试将步骤 1 的评分方式改为及格/不及格,这扰乱了课程和评估操作,学校的分层评分做法也受到了严格审查。美国东北部的 6 所公立和私立医学院校注意到,学校花费了大量的时间和精力来解决目前的学生成绩申诉问题,因此通过根本原因分析(RCA)对成绩申诉问题进行了检查。从 2021 年 11 月到 2022 年 4 月,作者回顾了教育工作者团队之前遇到的评分难题的具体事例。2022 年 5 月至 6 月,作者们开会讨论了 "为什么学生对评分过程和系统或结果提出质疑?2022 年 7 月至 10 月,作者通过分析鱼骨图(流程、设备、材料、人员和环境)的结果,并使用 "五个为什么 "技术,找出了根本原因。作者发现了造成成绩申诉和各院校评分系统具有挑战性的几种潜在原因,包括评估人员的素质或经验参差不齐、实习的目标和期望不明确、评分过程缺乏透明度、采用分级评分系统、设备的技术问题以及对教师临床工作效率的要求。在针对 RCA 中发现的根本原因提出解决方案时,将各种因素与医学教育联络委员会(LCME)的标准进行了映射,以促进评分质量和流程的改进。作者提出了一种新颖的 RCA 和 LCME 方法,旨在支持学习环境和公平等效的评估过程,该方法有助于改进评分系统,并有可能提高学习效果和成功率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Academic Medicine
Academic Medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
982
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.
期刊最新文献
Effect of Coaching on Trainee Burnout, Professional Fulfillment, and Errors: A Randomized Controlled Trial. An Examination of Grade Appeals via a Root Cause Analysis. A "Totally Different Beast": The Effect of Time Variability on Clinical Competency Committee Decision-Making. A Novel Competency-Based, Time-Variable Mid-Career Fellowship Program in Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Improving Compassionate Communication Through a Train-the-Trainer Model: Outcomes and Mechanisms for Transformation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1