Faculty Evaluation Scores Research Articles

Effectiveness of asynchronous feedback in teaching motivational interviewing skills

AbstractIntroductionCommunication is an essential skill for pharmacists. Motivational interviewing is an advanced communication technique used for health behavior change. Studies have evaluated standardized patient (SP) simulation to develop communication skills; however, little is known about the use of SP simulations with asynchronous feedback in a telepharmacy scenario.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to determine if the use of asynchronous embedded faculty feedback will improve students' motivational interviewing skills.MethodsDuring didactic training, students were introduced to motivational interviewing, practiced evaluation using a standardized rubric (max score 25), and participated in role‐play. Following training, students completed 2 weeks of lab simulation, one formative and one summative, in which students completed a 5‐min motivational interview with a SP via Zoom© which was recorded to allow for student self‐evaluation and asynchronous faculty video‐embedded feedback. Each encounter was assessed by faculty using the standardized rubric. The primary outcome measure was the difference in faculty evaluation scores of student interviews between the formative and summative labs. Secondary outcome measures included the difference in student self‐evaluation scores between the formative to summative labs and a number of students achieving competency (≥ 80%) or mastery (≥ 90%). Statistical analysis was completed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests (SAS® version 9.4).ResultsOne hundred fourteen students completed the study. Scores improved by a mean of 3.8 points between the formative and summative labs. Student self‐evaluation improved an average of 1.5 points between the labs. Competency and mastery were achieved by 89.5% and 52.6% of students, respectively. Score differences were not influenced by SP assigned. Use of SP and embedded asynchronous feedback in a motivational interviewing telepharmacy simulation resulted in improved student performance.

Faculty Scoring of General Surgery Residency Interviewees: A Comparison of In-Person and Virtual Interview Formats

With new rules regarding social distancing and non-essential travel bans, we sought to determine if faculty scoring of general surgery applicants would differ between the in-person interview (IPI) and virtual interview (VI) platforms. A single institution, retrospective review comparing faculty evaluation scores of applicant interviewees in the 2019 and 2020 MATCH® application cycles (IPIs) and the 2021 and 2022 application cycle (VIs) was conducted. Faculty scored applicants using a 5-point Likert scale in 7 areas of assessment and assigned each student to 1 of 4 tiers (tier 1 highest). A composite score for the 7 assessments (maximum score 35) was calculated. Mean and composite scores and tiers were compared between VI and IPI cycles and adjusted for within-interviewer correlations. The variance of the 2 groups were also compared. Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, an academic, tertiary care hospital. General Surgery applicants for the 2019 to 2022 MATCH® application cycles. Four hundred forty-one faculty IPI ratings of General Surgery applicants were compared to 531VI ratings. No difference in mean composite scores, individual assessments, or tier ranking. Less variance was identified in the VI group for academic credentials (0.6 vs 0.6, p = 0.01), strength of letters (0.7 vs 0.4, p = 0.005), communication skills (0.4 vs 0.6, p = 0.01), personal qualities (0.2 vs 0.5, p = 0.02), overall sense of fit for program (0.6 vs 0.9, p = 0.01), and tier ranking (0.3 vs 0.4, p = 0.004). Faculty ratings of General Surgery applicants in the VI format appear to be similar to IPI. However, faculty ratings of VI applicants demonstrated less variability in scores in most assessments. This finding is potentially concerning, as it may suggest an inability of VI to detect subtle differences between applicants as comparted to IPI.

Attending Reviews of Residents Correlate with ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination Failure

Since the American Board of Radiology (ABR) instituted the new system of board certification, there has been much discussion as to the test's validity. We decided to evaluate if subjective evaluation of resident performance correlated with ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination performance at this single institution. Data regarding resident evaluation scores by attending physicians and passage of board examinations was gathered regarding residents who had taken the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination from 2013 through 2019 for a total of 42 residents, eight of whom failed the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination on their first attempt. A univariate analysis comparing scores with resident passage or failure of the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination on the first attempt and analyses correcting for class year only and class year and number of evaluations was performed. The non-weighted average evaluation score of years 1, 2, and 3 was 80.24% for those who failed the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination and 83.71 % for those who passed. On univariate analysis along with analyses correcting for class year only and class year along with number of evaluations, there was a statistically significant correlation with decreased evaluation scores averaged over the three years of residency and failure of the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination (p=0.0102, p=0.003, and p=0.0043). The statistical significance held for the average numerical score in each individual year of training in all analyses except for year 1 of the univariate analysis (p=0.1264). At the studied institution, there was a statistically significant correlation between lower subjective faculty evaluation scores and failure of the ABR Qualifying (Core) Examination.

Female Residents Give Themselves Lower Scores Than Male Colleagues and Faculty Evaluators on ACGME Milestones

Orthopedic surgery is one of the specialties with the lowest number of women residents and practicing surgeons. The gender discrepancy in orthopedic residency training may drive a competency bias. We asked whether female orthopedic surgery residents score themselves lower on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones than their male counterparts, and lower than their faculty evaluators. We conducted a retrospective review of ACGME Milestone data from faculty and residents over a 4-year period. The data were analyzed using a snapshot of PGY2 (n = 20 residents) and PGY4 (n = 19 residents) scores, and using a Generalized Estimation Equation (GEE) to account for additional data points from the same residents over the 4-year data collection period. Assessment scores were compiled from a single orthopedic surgery residency at Oregon Health & Science University from 2014 to 2017. The residency program has 5 residents in each program year (PGY1 through PGY5); a total of 25 residents during each year of the study were included. On average, female residents scored themselves lower than both their male counterparts and their faculty mentors. Female PGY2 self-evaluation scores were lower than males in both patient care (p = 0.005) and medical knowledge (p < 0.001). When the GEE model was applied to 99 responses from 41 residents over a 4-year period, there were no gender-related differences in resident self-evaluation scores and in faculty scores of male and female residents, with the exception of meniscal tear. For this milestone, faculty rated female residents lower than males. Furthermore, the differences between faculty evaluation scores and resident self-evaluation scores were significantly lower for males than for females for 4 of the clinical domains, as well as the systems-based practice domains of cost and communication. Our results indicate female residents are at risk for a competency bias during training, as reflected by evaluations using the ACGME Milestones.

Geriatric Oncology Workshop (GrOW): Development and Evaluation of a Nationwide Nursing Curriculum

IntroductionOncology nurses are key in caring for older adults with cancer, but few have received specialized training in gerontology. To address this, a geriatric oncology curriculum was developed for oncology nurses. Materials & MethodsThe Geriatric Oncology Workshop (GrOW) was developed and delivered to oncology nurses (n = 387) from 2016 to 2019. Workshops were evaluated using: 1) Assessment of preparedness, comfort, and skills; 2) Knowledge gained; 3) Participant evaluations of workshop (4-point Likert-type scale); 4) Faculty evaluations (10-point Likert-type scale); and 5) Follow-up assessment of goals. Descriptive statistics (frequencies, proportions, medians, means) were used to describe participants and results. Paired t-test was used to evaluate participants' knowledge gain, and linear mixed modeling was used to evaluate longitudinal changes in preparedness, comfort, and skill levels. ResultsOverall, 387 oncology nurses participated in GrOW. Participant-rated workshop evaluation means were 3.7 to 3.9. Overall, nurses had statistically significant increases in pre- to post- questionnaire scores of 18.8% (p < 0.001) in workshop 1, 26.8% (p < 0.001) in workshop 2, 24.9% (p < 0.001) in workshop 3, and 18.6% (p < 0.001) in workshop 4, with an overall mean of 22.4% (p < 0.001) knowledge gained for all four workshops. Nurses reported an increase in skill, comfort, and preparedness at 18 months for workshop 1, 2, and 3 and in skill and comfort at 12 months for workshop 4 (p < 0.01). Faculty evaluation scores ranged from 9.3 to 10.0. DiscussionA geriatric oncology curriculum designed for oncology nurses can improve levels of evidence-based knowledge and provide more skill, comfort, and preparedness in caring for this population.

Student Potential for Self-assessment in a Clinical Dentistry Practical Training Course on Communication Skills

This study aimed to investigate student potential for self-assessment in a clinical dentistry practical training course focused on communication skills. Participants were 124 fourth-year students (70 males, 54 females; all Japanese) in 2017 and 2018 at the Nippon Dental University, School of Life Dentistry at Niigata. Participating students belonged to different cohorts in 2017 and 2018. Participants were asked to complete a self-evaluation sheet at the end of each unit of the course. Their self-evaluation scores and the faculty evaluation scores for each student for Units 1-1, 1-2, and 1-3 were statistically analyzed. The results showed that females tended to rate themselves significantly higher than males. Furthermore, there were significant differences in evaluation scores between students and faculty for nine of 11 evaluation items for male students and 10 of 11 items for female students in Unit 1-3. Faculty expectations increased from Unit 1-1 to Unit 1-3, although students were satisfied with their performance and had a sense of achievement. However, students’ actual performance was below faculty expectations, suggesting faculty evaluations were stricter than students’ self-evaluation. Self-assessment may enhance students’ ability for self-directed learning and may also inform how faculty can effectively educate dental students. Dental educators should support students to increase their levels of self-efficacy, which will enhance their self-evaluation skills.

Investigating Association Between Sex and Faculty Teaching Evaluation in General Surgery Residency Programs: A Multi-Institutional Study

In specialties with gender imbalance, such as general surgery, women faculty frequently receive lower teaching evaluation scores compared with men, which can affect academic advancement. We collected 1 year of anonymous resident-derived faculty teaching evaluations from 21 general surgery programs, along with resident, faculty, and department leadership gender complement. A composite evaluation score was calculated for each faculty. After accounting for within-program correlations, we compared male and female scores using the cluster-adjusted t-test to describe the respective mean differences with a 95% CI. Programs were divided into quartiles based on percent female faculty, female residents, and combined total females to detect associations between female representation and faculty teaching evaluation scores. The 21 programs yielded 20,187 teaching evaluations of 1,177 faculty. Women comprised 28% of the faculty, 47% of residents, 43% of program directors, and 19% of department chairs. Overall, women faculty had significantly higher evaluation scores than men (90.6% vs 89.5%, p<0.05). Female gender was associated with higher teaching evaluation scores compared with male faculty in the lowest quartiles for all combinations of women representation. This multi-institutional analysis of general surgical resident evaluations of faculty identified that female gender was associated with higher evaluation scores than men (although the difference was small). This unanticipated finding might reflect the slowly changing gender balance within general surgery and attitudes towards female faculty in a traditionally male-dominated field. Contrary to our hypothesis, female gender was associated with higher faculty evaluation scores at programs with fewer women faculty and fewer women residents.

Predicting Quality of Clinical Performance From Cardiology Fellowship Applications.

Variables in cardiology fellowship applications have not been objectively analyzed against applicants' subsequent clinical performance. We investigated possible correlations in a retrospective cohort study of 65 cardiology fellows at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, Minn) who began 2 years of clinical training from July 2007 through July 2013. Application variables included the strength of comparative statements in recommendation letters and the authors' academic ranks, membership status in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society, awards earned, volunteer activities, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores, advanced degrees, publications, and completion of a residency program ranked in the top 6 in the United States. The outcome was clinical performance as measured by a mean of faculty evaluation scores during clinical training. The overall mean evaluation score was 4.07 ± 0.18 (scale, 1-5). After multivariable analysis, evaluation scores were associated with Alpha Omega Alpha designation (β=0.13; 95% CI, 0.01-0.25; P=0.03), residency program reputation (β=0.13; 95% CI, 0.05-0.21; P=0.004), and strength of comparative statements in recommendation letters (β=0.08; 95% CI, 0.01-0.15; P=0.02), particularly in letters from residency program directors (β=0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.08; P=0.009). Objective factors to consider in the cardiology fellowship application include Alpha Omega Alpha membership, residency program reputation, and comparative statements from residency program directors.

Remediation of the Struggling Clinical Educator.

Remediation of the Struggling Clinical Educator.

An analysis of residents' self-evaluation and faculty-evaluation in internal medicine standardized residency training program using Milestones evaluation system

Objective: To assess the value of internal medicine residency training program at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH), and the feasibility of applying revised Milestones evaluation system. Methods: Postgraduate-year-one to four (PGY-1 to PGY-4) residents in PUMCH finished the revised Milestones evaluation scales in September 2017. Residents' self-evaluation and faculty-evaluation scores were calculated. Statistical analysis was conducted on the data. Results: A total of 207 residents were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Both self and faculty scores showed an increasing trend in senior residents. PGY-1 residents were assessed during their first month of residency with scores of 4 points or higher, suggesting that residents have a high starting level. More strikingly, the mean score in PGY-4 was 7 points or higher, proving the career development of residency training program. There was no statistically significant difference between total self- and faculty-evaluation scores. Evaluation scores of learning ability and communication ability were lower in faculty group (t=-2.627, -4.279, all P<0.05). The scores in graduate students were lower than those in standardized training residents. Conclusions: The goal of national standardized residency training is to improve the quality of healthcare and residents' career development. The evaluation results would guide curriculum design and emphasize the importance and necessity of multi-level teaching. Self-evaluation contributes to the understanding of training objectives and personal cognition.

An Analysis of Grades, Class Level and Faculty Evaluation Scores in the United Arab Emirates

&lt;p class="apa"&gt;This study examined the results of a student evaluation of faculty against the grades awarded and the level of the course for a higher education institution in the United Arab Emirates. The purpose of the study was to determine if the grades awarded in the course and/or level of the course impacted the evaluation scores awarded to the faculty member. The study utilized a 25-question student perception survey coupling course results with the overall course grade point average (GPA) and the course level. All courses were undergraduate. Descriptives for the responses were obtained prior to conducting a factor analysis for the purposes of dimension reduction. The analysis included 184 course pairings. The data set was examined to verify satisfaction of assumptions appropriate for factor analysis. Reliability analysis yielded a Chronbach’s alpha of 0.974. The factor analysis identified three underlying factors accounting for 80.07% of the variance. These three factors were identified as (1) overall perception of instruction, (2) the relationship of the grade and course level and (3) course management. Results of the study did not indicate that the grades given in a class nor the level of the course significantly affected the evaluations provided by the students. Grades and the level of the course were found to align. Student achievement in the course was also found to relate to the student’s perception of fair treatment by the faculty member.&lt;/p&gt;

Selection Of Endocrinology Subspecialty Trainees: Which Applicant Characteristics Are Associated With Performance During Fellowship Training?

To determine which residency characteristics are associated with performance during endocrinology fellowship training as measured by competency-based faculty evaluation scores and faculty global ratings of trainee performance. We performed a retrospective review of interview applications from endocrinology fellows who graduated from a single academic institution between 2006 and 2013. Performance measures included competency-based faculty evaluation scores and faculty global ratings. The association between applicant characteristics and measures of performance during fellowship was examined by linear regression. The presence of a laudatory comparative statement in the residency program director's letter of recommendation (LoR) or experience as a chief resident was significantly associated with competency-based faculty evaluation scores (β = 0.22, P = .001; and β = 0.24, P = .009, respectively) and faculty global ratings (β = 0.85, P = .006; and β = 0.96, P = .015, respectively). The presence of a laudatory comparative statement in the residency program director's LoR or experience as a chief resident were significantly associated with overall performance during subspecialty fellowship training. Future studies are needed in other cohorts to determine the broader implications of these findings in the application and selection process.

Evaluation of Team-Teaching as a Means of Integrating Microbiology and Pharmacology

Team-teaching is a commonly used method for delivering content in medical schools with an integrated curriculum. However, there is wide variation in the temporal organization of a team-taught course at the session (i.e., lecture) level. The two most prominent team-teaching strategies are (1) co-teaching sessions with multiple faculty in each session or (2) independently teaching sessions with a single faculty in each session. Current studies evaluating the effects of team-teaching on student outcomes are lacking. Our goal in this study was to determine if the temporal organization of team-taught sessions would alter student exam performance in an integrated medical school course taught by faculty from different disciplines. Here, we compare exam performance of students co-taught microbiology and pharmacology with students independently taught microbiology and pharmacology in separate “stand-alone” sessions. Our results demonstrate that students performed lower on microbiology topics in the independently taught stand-alone sessions as compared to the co-taught sessions. The decrease in microbiology scores was accompanied by a slight decrease in the microbiology faculty evaluation scores. The pharmacology-specific performance was not significantly altered between the two approaches although the pharmacology faculty evaluation scores increased in the individually taught iteration of the course compared to the co-taught version. These results suggest that although co-teaching the basic sciences in an integrated fashion led to improvements in student performance, these gains should be carefully balanced with the considerable investment of time and resources associated with co-teaching.

Content Analysis of Course Plans Presented by Teachers in the School of Health of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (2012-2013)

Background: Course plan is among the useful tools to improve the quality of education. This study is conducted to analyze the content of course plans presented by teachers in the School of Health of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Methods:In this cross - sectional study, 98 out of 102 course plans of second semester of the academic year 2012-2013 were evaluated. The data was collected using a checklist containing 11 dimensions. Data was analyzed using descriptive and analytical statistics . Results:The average score of evaluation was 23.2 ± 3.2. A significant correlation was observed between faculty gender, employment status and evaluation scores of their course plans (P<0.001). The greatest shortcomings were related to dimensions of educational assistance tools (64.3%), objectives (51%). The dimensions of Goals in the lesson plans (92.9%), outline (90.8%), gained the highest scores. Conclusions: Most of the course plans contents were in an acceptable level although there is a room for improvement in the quality of the course plan content.

Empirical analysis of the effect of teachers＇ background characteristics on the students＇ evaluation of teaching

Objective Analyzing the impact of teachers＇ background characteristics on the Students＇ evaluation to improve the quality of teaching from the angle of the teachers professional development. Methods Based on the data of students＇ evaluation of teaching of Shanghai medical college of Fudan University from 2008 to 2011, the article analyzed the teachers＇ gender, age, job title, diploma, and other relevant background characteristics. Excell2007 was used to build dataset and the data was analyzed statistically by software of SPSS 11.0 and expressed with x±s. The statis-tical method of one-way analysis of variance was used to compare the teachers with different genders, education backgrounds, ages and professional titles, showing statistically significant difference （P<0.05）. Results comparative analysis showed that no statistically significant differences existed in fac-ulty teaching evaluation scores among the teachers of different genders or different education back-grounds（P=0.613 9、0.891 0）. There were however significant differences in teaching evaluation of teachers of diverse ages and professional ranks（P=0.017 3 and P=0.032 5）. Conclusions According to the analysis results of faculty teaching evaluations, associate professors＇ teaching evaluation scores were lower than intermediate grade teachers＇, and the score of the teachers between the age of 41 to 45 was lower than that of the teachers between the age of 36 to 40. Therefore individual variations and various social backgrounds of teaching faculties should be taken into consideration and the corresponding countermeasures for the professional development of teachers should been put forward. In addition, the cultivation of new teachers, young and middle-aged teachers should be strengthened, and the proportion of teaching evaluation in the Performance Appraisal should be increased. Key words: Teachers＇ background characteristics; The students＇ evaluation of teaching; Empirical analysis; Teaching evaluation

Early Performance in a Humanistic Medicine Course as a Predictor of Dental Students’ Later Clinical Performance

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that dental students' early ability to demonstrate a humanistic approach with patients is associated with later clinical performance. A first-year humanistic medicine course, Patient Doctor I (PDI), at Harvard School of Dental Medicine combines training in conducting the medical interview with human values, placing a high value on strengthening relationships with patients and emphasizing empowerment, respect, and strong communication skills. Retrospective data were collected in the following domains: PDI course evaluations, admissions information, National Board Dental Examination Parts I and II scores, and Promotions Committee and faculty evaluation scores for hand skills and humanistic and interactive patient-student skills. Planned linear contrasts comparisons were performed for each clinical outcome variable. Tests to support the a priori hypothesis of linear relationships between PDI evaluation ratings and clinical performance, defined as hand skills and humanistic and interactive patient-student skills scores, were significant, both at p=0.03. This study demonstrated the feasibility of measuring dental students' humanistic qualities during the first year. Humanistic qualities (PDI performance) during the first year were found to be associated with clinical performance in the third year of dental school.

Relationships between student peer and faculty evaluations of clinical performance: A pilot study

Background: Student peer evaluation is widely used as a form of formative or summative evaluation in a variety of classroom settings; however, the utilization of peer evaluation is not well reported in the nursing literature as part of the clinical evaluation process. Purpose: The purpose of this pilot study was to examine relationships between student peer and faculty evaluations of clinical performance in a baccalaureate nursing program. Participants consisted of clinical faculty (n = 2) and their nursing students (n = 23) enrolled in their first clinical course in a pre-licensure baccalaureate nursing program. The specific research questions were: 1) Is there a relationship between nursing student peer and faculty evaluation of clinical performance? 2) And if there is a relationship between the two groups, is there a difference between nursing student peer and faculty evaluations? Methods: A peer evaluation tool was developed with a 5-point Likert scale consisting of 21 items that comprised five domains of clinical performance (communication, professionalism, teamwork, nursing process, and patient safety). Content validity of the tool was established using a panel of nurses with expertise in clinical performance and psycho- metric measurement. At midterm, students were asked to evaluate each other’s performance using the tool and the faculty also evaluated each student using the same tool. A subscore for each of the domains was created for both student peer and faculty evaluations. The relationships between student peer and faculty evaluation scores were assessed using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficients. Comparisons between student peer and faculty evaluations were made using paired t -tests. A p -value &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Findings: Significant positive correlations were found between peer and faculty evaluations for all domains. Statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in all of the domains, with students evaluating their peers highest in the domains of patient safety and communication; faculty scored students highest in the domains of patient safety and teamwork. The findings suggest that student peer evaluation can be valuable for students and faculty in clinical education. Conclusion: Previous studies provided that peer evaluation is a valid and reliable evaluation procedure in dentistry, medicine, pharmacy, and social behavioral sciences. This pilot study has demonstrated that student peer evaluation as part of a formative assessment can be also used for faculty to evaluate students’ clinical performance in a baccalaureate nursing program.

A Comparison of Students’ Self-Assessments With Faculty Evaluations of Their Communication Skills

To compare students' self-assessment of their communication skills with faculty members' formal evaluation of their skills in a therapeutics course. Over a 3-year period, faculty members evaluated second-year pharmacy students' communication skills as part of a requirement in a therapeutics course. Immediately following an individual oral assessment and again following a group oral assessment, students self-assessed their communication skills using the same rubric the faculty members had used. Students' self-assessments were then compared with faculty members' evaluation of students' communication skills. Four hundred one (97.3%) students consented to participate in this study. Faculty evaluation scores of students for both the individual and group oral assessments were significantly higher than students' self-assessment scores. Students' self-assessment scores of their communication skills increased from the individual to the group oral assessment. Students' self-assessments of communication skills were consistently lower than faculty members' evaluations. Greater use of oral assessments throughout the pharmacy curriculum may help to improve students' confidence in and self-assessment of their communication skills.

Student assessment by objective structured examination in a neurology clerkship

We evaluated the reliability and predictive ability of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in the assessment of medical students at the completion of a neurology clerkship. We analyzed data from 195 third-year medical students who took the OSCE. For each student, the OSCE consisted of 2 standardized patient encounters. The scores obtained from each encounter were compared. Faculty clinical evaluations of each student for 2 clinical inpatient rotations were also compared. Hierarchical regression analysis was applied to test the ability of the averaged OSCE scores to predict standardized written examination scores and composite clinical scores. Students' OSCE scores from the 2 standardized patient encounters were significantly correlated with each other (r = 0.347, p < 0.001), and the scores for all students were normally distributed. In contrast, students' faculty clinical evaluation scores from 2 different clinical inpatient rotations were uncorrelated, and scores were skewed toward the highest ratings. After accounting for clerkship order, better OSCE scores were predictive of better National Board of Medical Examiners standardized examination scores (R(2)Δ = 0.131, p < 0.001) and of better faculty clinical scores (R(2)Δ = 0.078, p < 0.001). Student assessment by an OSCE provides a reliable and predictive objective assessment of clinical performance in a neurology clerkship.

Medical Students' Goals, Methods and Opinions on Self-directed Learning and Analysis of Self-assessment

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the goals, methods and opinions of medical students on self-directed learning(SDL) and to compare the self-assessments with faculty-evaluations. Methods: The study group included 90 medical students doing their clerkship in the department of Laboratory Medicine, Mokdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University, School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea, from August 2005 to October 2006. Students were asked to review cases, formulate learning goals, implement appropriate learning strategies and present learning outcomes. Students' opinions on SDL were collected. Their self-assessments were compared with the faculty evaluation scores using the same checklist. Three groups were defined according to the faculty scores: scores >12, high; scores 10～12, middle; scores