EPC/IMPC Information Technology Subcommittee

March 3, 2003, Meeting Notes

Present: David S. Resch, MD, Chair; Terri Cameron, MA, Staff; Rhona Kelley, MSLS; Regina Kovach, MD; Jeffrey Suzewits, MD

Absent: Rafath Baig, Class of 2003; Michael Bass, Class of 2004; Rodney Curtis, MD; Ryan Diedrich, Class of 2005; George Dunaway, PhD; Gary Dunnington, MD; Bradley Dyrstad, Class of 2006; Janek Koirala, MD; Scott MacGilvray, MD; Claudia McIntyre MS; Dean Naritoku, MD; Michael Shanahan, PhD; Akshay Sood, MD

· Educational Technology Sessions: Ms. Cameron reported that Rick French had already sent his slides for the March 26 session wireless networking and that posters would be up by the end of the week.

· Informatics in the Curriculum: Dr. Resch reported that only one curriculum director had completed the survey. Based on feedback from the curriculum directors, he is going to review the survey and re-send it.

· Assessment Software Process: Ms. Cameron demonstrated the Internal Medicine Clerkship Exam, which includes a good set of graphics, as it currently appears in Perception. The same exam was then shown in WebCT. Due to technical difficulties, it was not possible to show the same exam in LxR, although the exam has been imported into LxR, and she was able to discuss the issues of using LxR for the exam. Jean Afflerbach, who supports assessment software in the Office of Education and Curriculum, provided the following chart regarding the three software packages:

Comparison of Assessment Software
(Y = yes; YE = easy; YD = difficult but possible; N = no)

	LxR	Perception	WebCT
Ability to work with OpScan	Y	N	Y
Ability to import existing exam questions and their associated data	YE (direct from excel spreadsheet)	YD (must add coding to each question and choice)	Using Respondus, direct import from Word
Ability to import student, faculty, discipline, keyword, etc., data	YE	YD	Y
Ability to export question and performance data into spreadsheets for manipulation and reporting by spreadsheet and database programs	E	D	Y
Ability to display four and five-item multiple choice questions with at least 500 characters for stems and responses	Y	Y	Y
Ability to display question questions in clinical vignette format	Y	Y
Ability to store display detailed patient information for use in assessing students’ clinical reasoning (patient information, including detailed normal laboratory values that can be used in creating new patient scenarios)	Y	Y
Ability to create a follow-up scenario for a standardized patient encounter	?	?	?
Ability to import and present audio and video clips	Y	Y
Ability to link questions to a set of categories (e.g., disciplines, learning issues, keywords, objectives, etc,) and provide item analysis based on those categories	Y	N
Ability to produce online and printed reports of individual and aggregate student performance on the current exam, as well as performance across all exams or subsets of exams in the system	YE	YD
Ability to produce item analysis reports including: quartile or quintile reports of aggregate student performance or a subset of student performance on the current exam, as well as for all exams or subsets of exams in the system	YE	YD
Ability to produce item performance reports over time for all students or subsets of students, including information about the exams in which the item was used	Y	YD
Ability to produce exam statistical reports (high score, low score, mean, median, standard deviations, standard error of measurement)	YE	YD
Ability to produce exam reliability statistics (Cronbach’s Alpha, Homogeneity, Pass/Fail)	Y	N?
Cost for software, upgrade, or new feature

It was noted that many of the fields are currently blank for WebCT, since OEC has just started working with the software. All three packages support all necessary question types, and all have pros and cons for set-up, importing of questions, maintenance, and exam administration. Ms. Cameron noted that the University of Iowa has developed a comprehensive assessment package as well, and that it might be advantage to review its capabilities before making a final decision. It was noted that, in the current fiscal situation, it might not be possible to upgrade assessment software, and that the decision might have to be made between LxR and WebCT, since both of those programs can be used without expending additional funds. More information regarding WebCT will be provided for the April meeting.

PDA Project: Dr. Resch reported that the February 13 faculty meeting had been attended by only IT Subcommittee members and a Medicine resident, who wanted to find out more about who to talk to about using PDAs. Based on this apparent lack of interest, the IT Subcommittee will continue with its current policy:

Students should be cognizant of how individual faculty view the use of PDAs in clinical settings. Although we would like for all students to be able to take advantage of the information stored in their PDAs, this equipment is not meant to be a distraction from clinical activities and it should always be used in a professional manner. If the attending physician supports the use of a PDA in the clinical setting, students should always explain to patients that they are using the "handheld computer" to take notes and look up information so that patients understand that the PDA is a patient-care tool, not a toy.

· WebCT: Ms. Cameron reported that course areas had been set up for the Year 2 Endocrine/Reproduction/Gastrointestinal Unit and Year 3 Internal Medicine Clerkship. OEC staff will set the courses up using existing web-based course materials and provide demonstrations to the individual course directors. If those course directors agree to pilot WebCT, demonstrations will be given to the Year 2 and Year 3 Curriculum Committees for possible implementation across those two years of the curriculum. Although there are several advantages to working with WebCT, two major advantages are that data can be exported from CurrMIT (the national curriculum database) into WebCT, and the WebCT course calendar has a PDA synchronization tool.

· Educational Portfolios: This topic was not discussed due to time constraints.

Other: Dr. Suzewits reported that he had arranged for Steve Reed, the president of New Innovations, to visit Springfield on March 11 and 12, and that a special IT Subcommittee meeting had been scheduled for 8:30 am on March 12, and that an open meeting for all faculty and staff was scheduled for noon of the same day.

· The next meeting of the subcommittee is scheduled for Monday, April 7, from noon to 1 pm in the Harbinger Conference Room in Springfield and Lindegren 310 in Carbondale.