An Improved Method Of Teaching Faculty Evaluation
Brittany C. Montross, MD, Michael Lamb, PhD, Linda M. Harris, MD.
University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.
OBJECTIVES: Small training programs render faculty evaluation difficult given resident/fellow concern for lack of anonymity. We adjusted from per rotation online evaluation (OE) only to a collective model (CM) semiannually. Our objective was to determine faculty/trainee opinions following this change in ACGME accredited Vascular Surgery Training Programs.
METHODS: The CM was instituted June 2021, and repeated December 2021 and June 2022. Faculty was absent during trainee evaluation discussions. Residents and fellows were asked to identify at least 1 positive and 2 areas for improvement for all faculty. Collective evaluations were summarized and given to the Program Director who distributed to faculty. Surveys were anonymously collected via Survey Monkey from all trainees and faculty assessing the process.
RESULTS: A total of 7/8 trainees and 12/15 faculty responded. Faculty reported receiving feedback annually (41.67%) or not at all (33.33%) despite evaluations completed per rotation prior to the CM. Since implementing the CM, 66.67% reported receiving feedback semiannually, 16.67% annually, with 2 reporting no feedback. Trainees preferred to evaluate faculty semiannually (42.86%), while 42.86% continue to prefer bimonthly. With OE, 57.14% of trainees trusted confidentiality, whereas 100% were comfortable with CM anonymity. Trainees guarded responses with OE (42.9%): 28.57% cited confidentiality concerns, 14.29% feared retaliation, and 42.86% believed feedback would be ignored. Faculty (33.33%) similarly voiced concerns about trainee's candor with OE. During CM, 85% of trainees reported fully candid evaluations, with 14.29% voicing lack of change concerns. 58.33% of faculty found the feedback accurate, with another 25% noting partial accuracy. 83.33% of faculty viewed the feedback as at least partially helpful and 75% initiated changes. Only 2 faculty found the CM feedback neither accurate nor helpful and 3 have not attempted suggested improvements. Since changing to CM, 83.33% of trainees noted positive changes in faculty. 71.43% of trainees favored continuing the CM, 14.29% requested a combination and no trainees supported returning to OE only. Similarly, faculty preferred CM with only 16.67% interested in returning to standard OE.
CONCLUSIONS: Collective faculty evaluations may be more useful than standard online evaluations in small training programs, leading to positive changes in teaching behavior for faculty. Enhanced trainee comfort and defined areas for attending improvement have led to positive changes which will hopefully translate into higher trainee satisfaction.
Back to 2023 Abstracts