Academic Psychiatry

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 110–115 | Cite as

An Approach to Address Grade Inflation in a Psychiatry Clerkship

Original Article

Abstract

Objective

Universally, clerkship grading is diverse and not standardized. The authors’ faculty was troubled by the inability to provide meaningful evaluations, as more than 60% of students received the highest grade. Although a psychiatry clerkship mandate of a faculty-observed student clinical interview existed for several years, the majority of students reported not completing the interview under direct observation by a faculty member and no meaningful feedback or evaluation for this activity existed. In order to create diversity in grading criteria and to examine clinical skills more thoroughly than previously, written and oral examinations were developed and supervised interviews of patients and written comprehensive psychiatric evaluations were added. A core group of department faculty was instructed in the use of materials and instruments designed to standardize the experiences and the student evaluations.

Results

Adding a wider diversity of experiences and evaluations to the clerkship, particularly assessment of interviewing skills, oral exams, and evaluation of comprehensive histories, has resulted in a more divergent spread of grades.

Conclusion

Clerkship grades can be effectively computed using various methods to examine knowledge and clinical skills. The addition of new methods of evaluation has added specificity to the performance feedback provided to the students completing the psychiatric clerkship. These changes have been viewed positively by department faculty and medical students. While requiring further refinement, they may eventually provide data to identify students requiring special attention in specific cognitive, relational and clinical skill areas.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Speer AJ, Solomon DJ, Fincher RME: Grade inflation in internal medicine clerkships. Teach Learn Med 2000; 12(3): 112–116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosenthal RH, Levine RE, Carlson DL, et al: The “Shrinking” Clerkship: Characteristics and Length of Clerkships in Psychiatry Undergraduate Education. Acad Psychiatry 2005; 29: 47–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Levine RE, Carlson DI, Rosenthal RH, et al: Usage of the National Board of Medical Examiners Subject Test in Psychiatry by U.S. and Canadian Clerkships. Acad Psychiatry 2005; 29: 52–57PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Simon SR, Pan RJD, Sullivan AM, et al: Views of managed care. A survey of students, residents, faculty, and deans at medical schools in the United States. NEJM 1999; 340(12): 928–936PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zakowski LJ, Seibert C, Van Eyck S, et al: Can specialists and generalists teach clinical skills to second-year medical students with equal effectiveness? Acad Med 2002; 77(10): 1030–1033PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Holmboe ES: Faculty and the Observation of Trainees’ Clinical Skills: Problems and Opportunities. Academic Medicine 2004; 79: 16–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schwartz RW, Donnelly MB, Sloan DA, et al: The relationship between faculty ward evaluations, OSCE and ABSITE as measures of surgical intern performance. J Surg Res 1994; 57: 613–618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Noel GL, Herbers JE, Caplow MP, et al: How well do internal medicine faculty members evaluate the clinical skills of residents? Ann Intern Med 1992; 117: 757–765PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalet A, Earp JA, Kowlowitz V: How well do faculty evaluate the interviewing skills of medical students? J Gen Intern Med. 1992; 97: 179–184Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levine R, O’Boyle M, Haidet P, et al: Transforming a Clinical Clerkship with Team Learning. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 2004; 16(3): 270–275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levinson W, Roter DL, Mullooly JP, et al: Physician-patient communication: The relationship with malpractice claims among primary care physicians and surgeons. JAMA 1997; 277: 553–559PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bondage G: Why did I miss the diagnosis? Some cognitive explanations and educational implications. Acad Med 1999; 74 (10 suppl): S138–S143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kirch W, Schafit C: Misdiagnosis at a university hospital in four medical areas. Report on 400 cases. Medicine 1996; 75: 29–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sierles FS, Daghestani A, Weiner CL, et al: Psychometric properties of ABPN-style oral examinations administered jointly by two psychiatry residency programs. Acad Psychiatry 2001; 25(4): 214–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leichner P, Sisler GC, Harper D: The clinical oral examination in psychiatry: association between subscoring and global marks’. Can J Psychiatry 1986; 31: 750–751PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academic Psychiatry 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Boon-shoft School of MedicineWright State UniversityDaytonUSA
  2. 2.Medical Student EducationWright State University Boon-shoft School of MedicineDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations