|
WEIGHT |
| CLINICAL
PERFORMANCE |
|
| 1. Review of Narrative
Comments in Performance Evaluations |
30% |
| 2. Numerical Data
from Performance Evaluations |
30% |
3. Clinical Skills
Exam
- Patient Encounters
- Orders
- Physical Examination
write-up
|
15%
5%
5% |
| 4. Ward Report Presentation |
15% |
| |
|
| KNOWLEDGE
AND CLINICAL REASONING |
60% |
| 1. NBME Subject
Test |
|
2. Clinical Skills
Exam
- EKG’s
- X-Rays
- Differential
Diagnosis
|
5%
5%
5% |
| 3. Ambulatory Report
Presentation |
15% |
| 4. Review of Comments
in Performance Evaluations |
10% |
| |
|
| PROFESSIONAL
BEHAVIOR/NON-COGNITIVE BEHAVIORS |
|
| 1. Review of Narrative
Comments in Performance Evaluations |
30% |
| 2. Numerical Data
from Performance Evaluations |
30% |
| 3. Attendance |
20% |
| 4. Peer Evaluation |
20% |
The clerkship director and the two associate clerkship directors
review each student’s file independently and rate each student’s
performance (S, U, E) in each category based on narrative comments
written by faculty and resident evaluators. These three faculty
members then meet together and discuss their ratings of student
files, giving extra attention to those students in which their ratings
were not in agreement; they come to a consensus regarding each student’s
performance.
- A SATISFACTORY
rating is assigned in a particular category, if satisfactory
or above average performance is indicated in comments on most
of the student’s performance evaluations.
- An EXCEEDS
EXPECTATIONS rating is assigned in a particular category,
if an exceptional or outstanding level of performance is indicated
in narrative comments on most of the performance evaluations.
The final rating is weighted
in each category as previously outlined.
Each student is presented
at a departmental faculty meeting for the faculty to review all
students’ evaluations and to advise the clerkship director
of the accuracy and completeness of evaluations contained in each
student’s file. In exceptional cases, a consensus of the department
of internal medicine faculty may change a student’s evaluation
at the faculty caucus.
Overall clerkship ratings
will be determined as follows.
- CLERKSHIP
HONORS – Students must “Exceed Expectations”
in all three categories to receive an “Honors”
rating for the clerkship.
- SATISFACTORY
– Students must receive “Satisfactory” or “Exceeds
Expectations” ratings in each of the three objective categories
to receive a satisfactory rating for the clerkship. In addition,
students must score at or above the 11th percentile
on the NBME subject test in Internal Medicine to receive a “Satisfactory”
rating in the Knowledge category.
- UNSATISFACTORY
– Students who receive an “Unsatisfactory” rating
in any of the three objective categories will receive an overall
rating of “Unsatisfactory” for the clerkship. Recommendations
to the Student Progress Committee will be based on the number
of “Unsatisfactory” ratings received. A rating of
“Unsatisfactory” in one category will result in a
recommendation for up to a four-week remediation; an “Unsatisfactory”
in two categories, an eight-week remediation; and “Unsatisfactory”
in all three categories, an eleven-week remediation. For each
of the categories, specific remedial activities will be suggested.
While this plan is adhered to in almost all instances, the faculty
of the Department of Medicine reserves the right to make exceptions.
Clinical Clerkship
Grade Review Process – NOTE: This Policy shall apply
to all Clerkships taken during Year 3 and Year 4, including the
Medical Humanities Clerkship.
All students shall be
entitled to ask for a review of a final clerkship grade by the department
and receive a timely response. All departments shall be required
to substantially comply with the following guidelines.
When the final grade for the clerkship is assigned, students will
receive e-mail notification from the department indicating that
the evaluations are complete and have been sent to the Office of
Student Affairs. Students will receive a second e-mail notice when
the final evaluations have been officially recorded; this notification
will include a reminder of the Grade Review Policy.
If a student believes
there has been an error in the grading process, or believes the
final evaluation does not accurately reflect the performance, the
student may speak informally with the faculty to find a resolution.
However, the student is not required to pursue an informal review,
but instead may request a formal review.
To begin the formal review
process, a student must provide the Clerkship Director with a written
document that outlines the basis for the request. Unless there are
unusual or compelling circumstances, the written request, along
with any supporting documentation, must be filed by the student
within 30working days of the official recording of the final grade.
The request for review will prompt a review of the student’s
portfolio. The outcome of this review will be shared with the student
before any change in evaluation is submitted to the Office of Student
Affairs. The Clerkship Director, in writing, must respond to the
student’s request within 10 working days of receipt of the
request for review.
Should the student wish to have further review of the Clerkship
Director’s decision, a written request for grade review will
be submitted to the Chair of the Department within 10 working days
of the decision of the Clerkship Director. The Chair of the Department
must respond, in writing, to the request for review within 10 working
days of receipt of the request for review. The decision of the Chair
of the Department will be submitted as the final grade.