Milestones for the
assessment of residents in gr
adu
ate medic
al educ
ation m
ark
a ch
ange in our ev
alu
ation p
ar
adigms. The Accredit
ation Council for Gr
adu
ate Medic
al Educ
ation h
as cre
ated milestones
and defined them
as signific
ant points in development of
a resident b
ased on the 6 competencies. We propose th
at
a simil
ar
appro
ach be t
aken for resident
assessment of te
aching f
aculty. We believe this will est
ablish p
arity
and objectivity for f
aculty ev
alu
ation, provide improved d
at
a about
attending surgeons’ te
aching,
and st
and
ardize f
aculty ev
alu
ations by residents.
absSec_2">Methods
A small group of advanced surgery educators determined appropriate educational characteristics, resulting in creation of 11 milestones (an id="bf0010">Fig. 2a>an>) that were reviewed by faculty and residents. The residents have historically answered 16 questions, developed by our surgical education committee (an id="bf0015">Fig. 3a>an>), on a 5-point Likert score (never to very often). Three weeks after completing this Likert-type evaluation, the residents were asked to again evaluate attending faculty using the Faculty Milestones evaluation. The residents then completed a survey of 7 questions (scale of 1-9—disagree to strongly agree, neutral = 5), assessing the new milestones and compared with the previous Likert evaluation system.
absSec_3">Results
Of 32 surgery residents, 13 completed the Likert evaluations (3760 data points) and 13 completed the milestones evaluations (1800 data points). The number completing both or neither is not known, as the responses are anonymous when used for faculty feedback. The Faculty Milestones attending physicians’ scores have far fewer top of range scores (21% vs 42%) and have a wider spread of data giving better indication of areas for improvement in teaching skills.
The residents completed 17 surveys (116 responses) to evaluate the new milestones system. Surveys indicated that milestones were easier to use (average rating 6.13 ± 0.42 Standard Error (SE)), effective (6.82 ± 0.39) and efficient (6.11 ± 0.53), and more objective (6.69 ± 0.39/6.75 ± 0.38) than the Likert evaluations are. Average response was 6.47 ± 0.46 for overall satisfaction with the Faculty Milestones evaluation. More surveys were completed than evaluations, as all residents had an opportunity to review both evaluation systems.
absSec_4">Conclusions
Faculty Milestones are more objective in evaluating surgical faculty and mirror the new paradigm in resident evaluations. Residents found this was an easier, more effective, efficient, and objective evaluation of our faculty. Although our Faculty Milestones are designed for surgical educators, they are likely to be applicable with appropriate modifications to other medical educators as well.
