printable versionRate expectations: Evaluation experts assess curriculum
BY PATTI KAHN
David Fetterman and Jennifer Berry help faculty evaluate their courses.
Two and a half years ago, the medical school enacted a cutting-edge curriculum, but the work did not stop there. "The school also made a commitment to keep improving it," said Oscar Salvatierra, MD, who chaired the medical school faculty senate when the curriculum was being developed.
To provide a framework for ongoing assessment and improvement, the school established the Division of Evaluation in 2004 to poll students, faculty and administrators on the new curriculum. David Fetterman, PhD, an evaluation expert who has authored some of the definitive texts in the field, was recruited to lead the effort.
Under Fetterman's direction, instructors and course organizers now receive continual feedback from online student surveys, student focus groups, informal meetings, faculty self-assessments and external tests. This information helps them to determine which courses are effective and which need improvement—even mid-course. When asked recently how well the evaluation system is working, Fetterman pointed to significant improvements in courses that have been revised on the basis of student input. He noted that last year, for example, one course received a high rating from only 23 percent of the class. The course was substantially revised, and this year it received a high rating from 62 percent.
Kelley Skeff, MD, PhD, associate chair for education in the Department of Medicine, gives the review system a thumbs-up. "Stanford is currently doing a laudable job of enhancing the process of evaluation through the use of professional evaluation experts," he said. "Students, and ultimately patients and science, will benefit as we more effectively measure and achieve our goals."
Fetterman said that he has been impressed by the faculty's receptiveness to feedback. "Even to negative comments," he remarked. Dean Philip Pizzo, MD, and Julie Parsonnet, MD, senior associate dean for medical school education, have provided critical support to the new evaluation process, he added.
Course evaluation is not totally new to the medical school. Yet while courses in the previous medical school curriculum were evaluated, the feedback was not "optimally coordinated," said Salvatierra. "Having an education expert, Fetterman, enhances the analysis."
Fetterman noted that having an organized, well-planned evaluation process is particularly important for Stanford's medical school courses, which are graded on a Pass/Fail basis and therefore do not provide the markers of success that traditional grades do.
The evaluation process, which is overseen by evaluation manager Jennifer Berry, enhances not only the standard courses but also students' work in the newly established scholarly concentrations, an innovative part of the new medical school curriculum. In scholarly concentrations, each first-year medical student selects a specific aspect of medicine that excites him or her for a multiyear study of the subject.
To assess the effectiveness of the concentrations, faculty have learned to use a process called empowerment evaluation. It lets them combine student feedback with their own evaluations and "assess how well they're doing—to reinforce what's working and to pinpoint areas that need work," said Fetterman. Once trained in empowerment evaluation, they can independently apply the process on a regular basis.
Although it is too soon to declare the new curriculum a success, Fetterman said it is "going in the right direction."
"There are still some bumps in the road," he added, "but the evaluations have reported promising developments, especially in the way the school's medical education is now linking clinical practice with basic science."
Patti Kahn is a science-writing intern in the Office of Communication & Public Affairs at the School of Medicine.