MINUTES

Educational Policy Committee

EVU SUBCOMMITTEE

November 28, 2000

 


 

Present:

Dr. Steward

Dr. Borgia

Dr. Faingold

Dr. Dorsey

Dr. Browning

Dr. Eberle

 

Absent:

Dr. Loschen

Dr. Kruse

 

Staff: Karen Reynolds RN, BSN




I.                    Review of letter to the Dean

 

Dr. Steward reviewed the letter that was presented to the Dean and to the former EPC Chair, Dr. Resch.

 

The Dean has not provided a written response. However, in conversations with Dr. Steward, the Dean has asked the sub-committee to develop a general proposal that should include some EVU measures for some common educational activities.

 

 

II.                  Establishing proposed EVU's for common activities

Before considering specific EVU measures for common activities, the subcommittee discussed several topics, including what the eventual purpose or use of an EVU plan might be; and how the EVU subcommittee relates to the "new EPC" and the Dean. Also, members of the subcommittee reinforced the importance of measuring all faculty activities, including research and clinical service. These issues remain to be resolved, but for now were put aside, and the group proceeded to work on determining a draft EVU plan for common activities.

 

Dr. Steward referred the group to the AAMC Measuring Faculty Effort and Contributions in Medical Education (2000) paper and the tables found on pages 202 -- 203 and 204. The tables provided lists of educational activities, and for a few common activities, an average and a range of EVU's assigned by seven other medical schools.

 

The subcommittee determined that small group tutoring, such as is done in the first and second years of the curriculum, was a useful first activity to discuss. In general, the group agreed that "face time" was the best basic EVU estimate for activities that require limited preparation; and that the EVU value of activities such as tutoring would depend primarily on how much time a faculty member spent in the actual activity. Preparation time for tutors was assumed to be variable among faculty, and therefore was not included in the assignment of a value. The use of "modifiers" -- which might be used to multiply a basic EVU value if extra prep time or other qualification was required for an activity -- was discussed. The group also discussed the importance of ultimately including quality measures as modifiers in an EVU system. However, for now, to keep the process simple, the group decided not to pursue the use of modifiers, but rather to use our best combined judgement to assign values to other activities. Through further discussion, the group identified several common activities and arrived at reasonable consensus to propose an EVU value for each.

 

EVU's were then tentatively assigned to various activities as follows:

 

Activity

Units

Tutor Group Facilitator

1 unit per hour of "face time"

Lecture

4 units for a one hour lecture

Grand Rounds

Too variable to determine

Chair of an Education Committee

3 units per hour of meeting time

Education Committee Member

1 unit per hour of meeting time

Resource Session

4 units for a one hour resource session

Course/Segment Director

12 units per week while the course or segment is in session

Case Development

16 units for long cases

8 units for shorter cases

Evaluation Activities:

Too variable to determine

MCQ Development

1/2 unit per question

Clinical Exam Observer

1 unit per hour spent

Exam Case Development

Too variable to determine

Clinical Instruction in Clinical Environment

1 unit per half day clinic

 

 

 

Issues to be addressed/resolved include but are not limited to: measuring quality of educational effort; determining values for department-specific activities, including clinical; determining whether EVU modifiers should be developed; determining whether the number of faculty or the number of students involved in an activity should affect EVU measurement; considering what the denominator should be for all activities in a unit, or a curricular segment, or a department's rotation or clerkship.

 

The subcommittee determined that each member should review the proposed EVU values as listed above, and after review these values would be forwarded to the Dean.   

 

The meeting was adjourned at 12:40 p.m.

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

Karen L. Reynolds RN, BSN