Journal Article

A multi-institutional study assessing general surgery faculty teaching evaluations

Smith, Brian R., Namm, Jukes P., Murayama, Kenric, Calhoun, Kristine E., Tanner, Tiffany N., Robertson, Jamie M., Gauvin, Jeffrey M., Spain, David A., Dickinson, Karen J., Jarman, Benjamin T., Brasel, Karen J., Amersi, Farin, Zern, Nicole K., Salcedo, Edgardo S., Inaba, Kenji, Kaji, Amy H., Mpinga, Ebondo, Harrington, Darrel W., Cho, Nancy L., Shellito, Adam D., Poola, V. Prasad, Donahue, Timothy, Smink, Douglas S., Frey, Edgar Shields, Aarons, Cary B., de Virgilio, Christian

2021

Overview

Resident evaluation of faculty teaching is an important metric in general surgery training, however considerable variability in faculty teaching evaluation (FE) instruments exists. Twenty-two general surgery programs provided their FE and program demographics. Three clinical education experts performed blinded assessment of FEs, assessing adherence 2018 ACGME common program standards and if the FE was meaningful. Number of questions per FE ranged from 1 to 29. The expert assessments demonstrated that no evaluation addressed all 5 ACGME standards. There were significant differences in the FEs effectiveness of assessing the 5 ACGME standards (p < 0.001), with teaching abilities and professionalism rated the highest and scholarly activities the lowest. There was wide variation between programs regarding FEs development and adhered to ACGME standards. Faculty evaluation tools consistently built around all suggested ACGME standards may allow for a more accurate and useful assessment of faculty teaching abilities to target professional development. [Display omitted] •There is considerable variability in faculty teaching evaluation (FE) instruments.•Three independent clinical education experts performed a blinded assessment of the 22 FEs.•Experts assessed adherence to 2018 ACGME common program requirement standards and if the FE was meaningful and actionable.•No FE assessed all domains and there were significant differences in FEs effectiveness of assessing ACGME standards.•Wide variation between programs in how general surgery FEs were developed, utilized and adhered to the ACGME standards.

• Publisher: Elsevier Inc,Elsevier Limited
• Subject: Accreditation / Demography / Directors / Evaluation / Likert scale / Medical education / Meetings / Professional development / Software / Statistical analysis / Surgery / Teachers / Teaching / Training