Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Feb 17:16:65.
doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0586-4.

Optimizing the post-graduate institutional program evaluation process

Affiliations

Optimizing the post-graduate institutional program evaluation process

Monica L Lypson et al. BMC Med Educ. .

Abstract

Background: Reviewing program educational efforts is an important component of postgraduate medical education program accreditation. The post-graduate review process has evolved over time to include centralized oversight based on accreditation standards. The institutional review process and the impact on participating faculty are topics not well described in the literature.

Methods: We conducted multiple Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles to identify and implement areas for change to improve productivity in our institutional program review committee. We also conducted one focus group and six in-person interviews with 18 committee members to explore their perspectives on the committee's evolution. One author (MLL) reviewed the transcripts and performed the initial thematic coding with a PhD level research associate and identified and categorized themes. These themes were confirmed by all participating committee members upon review of a detailed summary. Emergent themes were triangulated with the University of Michigan Medical School's Admissions Executive Committee (AEC).

Results: We present an overview of adopted new practices to the educational program evaluation process at the University of Michigan Health System that includes standardization of meetings, inclusion of resident members, development of area content experts, solicitation of committed committee members, transition from paper to electronic committee materials, and focus on continuous improvement. Faculty and resident committee members identified multiple improvement areas including the ability to provide high quality reviews of training programs, personal and professional development, and improved feedback from program trainees.

Conclusions: A standing committee that utilizes the expertise of a group of committed faculty members and which includes formal resident membership has significant advantages over ad hoc or other organizational structures for program evaluation committees.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Heard JK, O’Sullivan P, Smith CE, Harpter RA, Schexnayder SM. An institutional system to monitor and improve the quality of residency education. Acad Med. 2004;79(9):858–864. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200409000-00011. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Afrin LB, Arana GW, Medio FJ, Ybarra AFN, Clarke HS. Improving oversight of the graduate medical education enterprise: One institution’s strategies and tools. Acad Med. 2006;81(5):419–425. doi: 10.1097/01.ACM.0000222258.55266.6a. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Musick DW. A conceptual model for program evaluation in graduate medical education. Acad Med. 2006;81(8):759–765. doi: 10.1097/00001888-200608000-00015. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Long TR, Poe JD, Zimmerman RS, Rose SH. A citation tracking system to facilitate sponsoring institution oversight of ACGME-accredited programs. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4(4):500–504. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-11-00313.1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Standards for curricula and assessment systems. Manchester, England: General Medical Council. http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/standards.asp. Accessed 15 Feb 2016.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources