Assessment of Medical Student Achievement of Competency‐based Objectives through Clinical Case Presentations

Introduction The Medical College of Georgia expects medical students to demonstrate competence in six domains (Medical Knowledge, Patient Care, Practice‐based Learning, Communication, Professionalism, and Systems‐based Practice). This study aims to assess medical student performance in three competency domains (Medical Knowledge, Practice‐Based Learning, and Communication) by evaluating student achievement during clinical case presentations, a self‐directed, small group activity that requires students to research a medical topic and present their findings to the class. We hypothesized that peer evaluators would rate their colleagues' achievement of these competencies higher than faculty evaluators and that student groups would perform satisfactorily on the Medical Knowledge competency but may struggle with competencies where they have less experience, such as Practice‐based Learning and Communication. Methods Student (n=8–10) and faculty (n=3) evaluations of first‐year student clinical case presentation groups (n=39) from academic year 2017–2018 were analyzed. Student performance was assessed using a grading rubric in which components were categorized based on these competencies. The data was analyzed using two‐tailed, two‐sample t‐tests. Results Students performed satisfactorily in all competencies assessed by the clinical case presentations. Overall average scores from faculty and peer evaluations on rubric elements addressing the Medical Knowledge competency were 84.6% ± 5.1% and 93.7% ± 2.6%, respectively. Overall average scores from faculty and peer evaluations on rubric elements addressing the Practice‐based Learning competency were 84.3% ± 7.8% and 95.3% ± 2.1%, respectively. Overall average scores from faculty and peer evaluations on rubric elements addressing the Communication competency were 84.7% ± 9.0% and 92.2% ± 5.0%, respectively. Students gave significantly higher scores compared to faculty for all categories under each competency (p<0.05). Discussion Medical students performed satisfactorily and similarly across all competencies assessed by clinical case presentations as evaluated by both faculty and peers. Yet, peer evaluators consistently gave significantly higher scores compared to faculty, suggesting over‐inflation. However, our previous research shows that the themes of narrative feedback are similar among student and faculty evaluators, even though faculty provide more constructive narrative feedback and student evaluators provide more positive feedback. Therefore, peers may recognize different levels of achievement but may not be able to effectively use the grading rubric or may not understand differences between levels of achievement within each competency. Clinical case presentations provide a needed opportunity for medical students to learn expected levels of achievement for each competency, and they provide opportunities for self‐monitoring and self‐reflection. Future plans include additional training for students on how to use the grading rubric, which may combat over‐inflation of scores that may be due to a misunderstanding of how to use the rubric. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .