Re-engaging students in medical school accreditation: the independent student analysis action (ISA2) approach

Abstract

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Background: Student satisfaction with key aspects of a medical school program plays a major role in an institution's accreditation in the United States (US). There is limited evidence regarding how to best engage students in responding to areas of lower student satisfaction that are identified through the national Liaison Committee on Medication Education (LCME) accreditation self-study process. Methods:We present a student-led innovation to promote greater levels of student engagement throughout Harvard Medical School's re-accreditation experience, which we refer to as the Independent Student Analysis Action (ISA ²) process. This innovation built directly upon the Independent Student Analysis (ISA) survey, which is expected by the LCME for accreditation. The ISA ² process allowed medical student leaders to leverage ISA results to identify 11 priority areas that had relatively lower levels of satisfaction and subsequently coordinate focused, time-limited ISA ² working groups to address these problematic areas. These working groups then presented their solutions to the student body, and a follow-up survey gauged satisfaction with these areas in light of the changes made. Results: The ISA ² process engaged over 110 students, faculty, and staff. The majority of the student body completed the follow-up survey, which demonstrated higher levels of satisfaction with these previously problematic areas as identified in the original ISA survey. Further, 96% of students reported being satisfied with the ISA ² process as a mechanism for utilizing student feedback in the ISA to create meaningful institutional changes. Conclusions: The ISA ² served as a powerful convening mechanism for engaging a large number of students in our institution's re-accreditation efforts. Other medical schools looking to involve students in their continuous quality improvement systems and accreditation experience may benefit from reviewing and customizing this model to their institution's needs.

Keywords: Liaison Committee on Medical Education; United States; accreditation; continuous quality improvement; student engagement; undergraduate medical education.

Figure 1.. Timeline of Overall ISA Process (Panel A) and the ISA ² process (Panel B).

Figure 1 Notes: T-0 = Site Visit. A more detailed summary is provided in Table 1. Additional information is available upon request.

Figure 2.. Student body satisfaction with the ISA ² process for utilizing feedback from the ISA survey to address areas of lower satisfaction, n=525 respondents.