MD Degree Program

Process and Procedures

All core and elective courses are reviewed in-depth by the appropriate review committee. Review committees take their responsibilities to the curriculum seriously and work with course directors on changes deemed necessary by the committee
Core Curriculum Committee (CCC) for core courses
Provides a summary of courses reviewed and actions taken at the end of each year (beginning Summer 2007)
Electives Committee (EC) for elective courses
Ultimately monitored by the CEP
Committee on Educational Policy (CEP)
Student representatives are members of each of these committees and are expected to solicit feedback from, as well as provide feedback to, their respective classmates

Students are evaluated in various core courses and clinical activities throughout medical school training
These evaluations are reviewed and compiled into the Dean's letter at the end of the 3rd year

Course Directors review the evaluation results for their courses (overall course evaluation, small groups, labs, lectures, etc.) and provide feedback to their faculty (faculty evaluations)

Evaluations of faculty also are available online to faculty once the student grades for that quarter have been submitted to the registrar
Caveat: When a course director wishes to give mid-course feedback to faculty for improvement purposes, the evaluation will state this clearly so you will know that the evaluation data will be given to faculty prior to grades being submitted

Each core course has a course committee that includes student representative(s). Evaluation data is used to assess strengths as well as weaknesses and highlight possible areas in need of change. It is the responsibility of the course directors and individual course committees to review evaluation results and address changes as deemed necessary.

Completion of evaluations is considered a professional responsibility for students and faculty

Providing constructive, accurate and timely feedback is considered a professional ethic

Evaluations completed by students are anonymous; however, professional and constructive feedback is expected. There are two exceptions to the anonymity of the evaluation data:

There are times when an evaluation may not be completely anonymous to the evaluatee, such as when you are the only student working with a specific faculty; for example, in Primary Care Clerkship. If you have serious concerns about that or other similar experiences, please report it to the course director or other administrative officer. Do not use the evaluation tool as a way to communicate that feedback under this circumstance.
If a student's comment in any evaluation is considered by the Evaluation office to be extremely unprofessional (goes far beyond the norm of human decency and respectful communication), the evaluation office will request a meeting with the Associate Deans of UGME and ASA, as well as a designated student representative. If in agreement with the evaluation office that the comment needs follow-up, the programmer of the evaluation system will de-identify that student and the student's name will be given to the Associate Deans of UGME and ASA for follow-up. This would be an extreme and rare circumstance.

While numeric and text responses from faculty are summarized in a final report, evaluations completed on students by faculty are not considered anonymous
Per policy, completion of evaluations by students is considered part of the overall course requirements

If a student fails to complete 10% or more of the evaluations in any one quarter, the student will be referred to the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education for follow-up.

Students are expected to complete evaluations in a timely manner (by the evaluation due date set by the course director) in order to achieve adequate reliability of the data
Faculty also are expected to complete their professional responsibilities in a timely manner, including completion of student evaluations (by the evaluation due date set by the course director).

Course Directors will review faculty evaluation data on student evaluations (completion rate and timeliness), intervene if appropriate, and/or refer to the chair of the department as deemed necessary.