DGSOM 3rd Year Grading System - History and Proposed Changes
Compiled by Christopher Redgate c/o 2014
Last updated October 24, 2013
Information from the Student Forums...
Video recording of the Forum held regarding grading changes on October 22, 2014
Student Powerpoint from Forum
Attachments from the statement below....
1. FEC forum invitation
2. Data on Current LODs Awarded
3. Other SOM 3rd Year Systems
4. MEC Grading Task Force Summary Sheet
Video recording of the Forum held regarding grading changes on October 22, 2014
Student Powerpoint from Forum
Attachments from the statement below....
1. FEC forum invitation
2. Data on Current LODs Awarded
3. Other SOM 3rd Year Systems
4. MEC Grading Task Force Summary Sheet
The MSC thought it would be best to compile a comprehensive statement laying out (1) Why is the school proposing these changes, (2) What are the changes, and (3) How the changes will come into effect. We hope these details help inform students so they may engaged in a more informed discussion during the open forum.
The Short:
A) 3rd + 4th Year Evaluation research revealed:
C) When would this happen: These changes would come into effect for the incoming classes (starting for the c/o 2018 or 2019) and would NOT affect any currently enrolled students.
D) What can you do about it: The FEC wants to hear what students have to say, so come to the their forums (1) to voice your opinion in favor or against these changes. They will use this feedback to directly impact if they accept, decline or modify the proposed cirriculur changes.
The Long:
THE HEART OF THE ISSUE: Adopting this new grading policy would be a departure from the UCLA's only "Pass/No Pass" system as now the clinical (3rd & 4th) years would be evaluated with an "Honors/High Pass/Pass/Fail." Some students feel that this system would better stratify students –helping those who did not get "LODs" but also did better than "Passing"- and subsequently help when applying to residency programs. Others feel that this would create more competition amongst students on rotations and alter the sense of community here at UCLA.
Basic background: The Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) is the faculty body that works with the Deans to approve any changes to the DGSOM education curriculum The Medical Education Committee (MEC) is a separate, student and faculty "sub"committee that is tasked to research issues and formulate recommendations to guide the FEC. At this stage, the MEC has approved recommendations to offer to the FEC, but the FEC has not formally adopted any curricular changes. They are holding these forum to hear what students have to say before they vote to make any changes.
(1) Why are we talking about these changes?
After years of discussing changes to the UCLA-only Letter of Distinction (LOD) system, last year an MS4 student (Lauren Wolchok) conducted some research about the statistics of LOD awards here at UCLA and the method of evaluations done at other schools. Keep in mind that the data presented below is from 2011 and there have been changes to the current system since to normalize the LOD/evaluation process. (partial results attached –2)
Pass/Fail/LOD Evaluation System Satisfaction:
The data she used included results from the LCME UCLA Student Self Survey (an analysis of questions answered by the entire student body covering varous aspects of student education and wellbeing created, distributed and analyzed by the MSC), which found: while students felt satisfied with the Pass/Fail (P/F) system in the 1st and 2nd years, most thought that using it during the 3rd and 4th year was not very helpful in getting into residency. It also found that a majority of students felt the LODs were not transparent and some felt that the system was not fair (results below)
LCME Student Self-Survey (Response Rates: c/o 2012 = 81.4%, c/o 2013 = 81.2%, c/o 2014 = 92.4%, c/o 2015 = 91.4%)
-92% satisfaction with P/F in preclinical years
-68% satisfaction with P/F in clinical years
-39% believe P/F helpful in applying to residency
-26% think LOD awards are transparent/ 59% disagree
-22% think LOD awards are fair/ 42% disagree
Another issue students had was that they felt some sites/rotations awarded more LODs since these are determined by your shelf score and your evaluations (with the thought being that some sites offer more generous evaluations than others). During her investigation to the consistency of LOD awards across sites and services, the data revealed that LODs were awarded on average to 20% students across sites, with 29% earning 1-2 LODs and 26% earning 3 or more. However, she did uncover there is a significant range depending on the clerkship (13-25% of students) and site (0% to 54% of students).
Other Schools' Evaluation Systems:
There was also extensive research done into the grading systems used at other schools (results attached-3). It found that among the Top 30 Allopathic Medical Schools in the nation, 77% of them use a system of 4 or more tiers (Fail/Pass/High Pass/Honors) for their clinical years, as opposed to our 3 tiered system (Fail/Pass/LOD)
(Please see attached document for a good summary of the above results –4)
(2) a) What changes are being proposed?
In order to see if our school could easily transition to the new system, they did a comparison between the 4-tiered grading system and our recent 7-point quantitative scale (used by faculty to evaluate students and then combined with shelf exam scores to determine Fail/Pass/LOD) to see if students would stratify in roughly the same distribution. The findings suggested that using an equivalency rubric of 7 = Honors, 6 = High Pass, 3-5 = Pass, and 1-2 = Fail "effectively stratified the class into the top quartile, middle 50%, and bottom quartile, respectively," with an R=0.71. While the system in place starting August 1st, 2013 is a new 5-point rubric and not a 7-point one, the committee believes that this information showed the ability to effectively translate our point scale into a 4-tier system.
Based on all of the information outlined above, here are the recommendations of the Grading Task Force of the Medical Education Committee (MEC):
Broad Goal:
"Adopting a 4-tier system of Honor/High Pass/Pass/Fail grading in the clinical clerkships and electives, and provide comparison data as a par of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) with the goal of improving grading transparency for students and residency programs."
Individual Recommendations:
1. Move to 4-point grading system (Honors, High Pass, Pass, and Fail) in 3rd and 4th years
2. Final evaluation grade will be comprised of clinical and exam performance
3. There should be a clear spell out in the MSPE of clinical and exam performance separately.
(THESE 3 ISSUES ABOVE are the individual aspects of grading changes that the FEC has yet to adopt and wants to hear YOUR opinion about)
b) Who will they affect?
These changes would only come into affect for the next incoming class of students (c/o 2018-hopefully or 2019). It would not affect any current students as we were all recruited and accepted to UCLA under the agreement that we would be evaluated on a purely Pass/No Pass system.
(3) How will the changes play out (what are the next steps)?
Again: The FEC wants to hear what students have to say, so come to the the upcoming forums on October 22nd and October 29th to voice your opinion in favor or against these changes. They will use this feedback to directly impact if they accept, decline or modify the proposed cirricular changes.
Thanks for getting through that long page! Hopefully you found it informative and useful background information in preparation for the forums. One of the key ways we garnered the ability to influence curriculum is by having a lot of our students engaged in these types of discussions and asking important questions of our faculty.
The Short:
A) 3rd + 4th Year Evaluation research revealed:
- Some students didn't think the LOD system is fair or transparent
- Comparison showed that LOD awards were highly variable between sites and rotations
- Of the "Top 30" Medical Schools, >75% of them are using grading systems with 4 or more tiers in the clinical years (while we are using LOD/Pass/Fail)
C) When would this happen: These changes would come into effect for the incoming classes (starting for the c/o 2018 or 2019) and would NOT affect any currently enrolled students.
D) What can you do about it: The FEC wants to hear what students have to say, so come to the their forums (1) to voice your opinion in favor or against these changes. They will use this feedback to directly impact if they accept, decline or modify the proposed cirriculur changes.
The Long:
THE HEART OF THE ISSUE: Adopting this new grading policy would be a departure from the UCLA's only "Pass/No Pass" system as now the clinical (3rd & 4th) years would be evaluated with an "Honors/High Pass/Pass/Fail." Some students feel that this system would better stratify students –helping those who did not get "LODs" but also did better than "Passing"- and subsequently help when applying to residency programs. Others feel that this would create more competition amongst students on rotations and alter the sense of community here at UCLA.
Basic background: The Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) is the faculty body that works with the Deans to approve any changes to the DGSOM education curriculum The Medical Education Committee (MEC) is a separate, student and faculty "sub"committee that is tasked to research issues and formulate recommendations to guide the FEC. At this stage, the MEC has approved recommendations to offer to the FEC, but the FEC has not formally adopted any curricular changes. They are holding these forum to hear what students have to say before they vote to make any changes.
(1) Why are we talking about these changes?
After years of discussing changes to the UCLA-only Letter of Distinction (LOD) system, last year an MS4 student (Lauren Wolchok) conducted some research about the statistics of LOD awards here at UCLA and the method of evaluations done at other schools. Keep in mind that the data presented below is from 2011 and there have been changes to the current system since to normalize the LOD/evaluation process. (partial results attached –2)
Pass/Fail/LOD Evaluation System Satisfaction:
The data she used included results from the LCME UCLA Student Self Survey (an analysis of questions answered by the entire student body covering varous aspects of student education and wellbeing created, distributed and analyzed by the MSC), which found: while students felt satisfied with the Pass/Fail (P/F) system in the 1st and 2nd years, most thought that using it during the 3rd and 4th year was not very helpful in getting into residency. It also found that a majority of students felt the LODs were not transparent and some felt that the system was not fair (results below)
LCME Student Self-Survey (Response Rates: c/o 2012 = 81.4%, c/o 2013 = 81.2%, c/o 2014 = 92.4%, c/o 2015 = 91.4%)
-92% satisfaction with P/F in preclinical years
-68% satisfaction with P/F in clinical years
-39% believe P/F helpful in applying to residency
-26% think LOD awards are transparent/ 59% disagree
-22% think LOD awards are fair/ 42% disagree
Another issue students had was that they felt some sites/rotations awarded more LODs since these are determined by your shelf score and your evaluations (with the thought being that some sites offer more generous evaluations than others). During her investigation to the consistency of LOD awards across sites and services, the data revealed that LODs were awarded on average to 20% students across sites, with 29% earning 1-2 LODs and 26% earning 3 or more. However, she did uncover there is a significant range depending on the clerkship (13-25% of students) and site (0% to 54% of students).
Other Schools' Evaluation Systems:
There was also extensive research done into the grading systems used at other schools (results attached-3). It found that among the Top 30 Allopathic Medical Schools in the nation, 77% of them use a system of 4 or more tiers (Fail/Pass/High Pass/Honors) for their clinical years, as opposed to our 3 tiered system (Fail/Pass/LOD)
(Please see attached document for a good summary of the above results –4)
(2) a) What changes are being proposed?
In order to see if our school could easily transition to the new system, they did a comparison between the 4-tiered grading system and our recent 7-point quantitative scale (used by faculty to evaluate students and then combined with shelf exam scores to determine Fail/Pass/LOD) to see if students would stratify in roughly the same distribution. The findings suggested that using an equivalency rubric of 7 = Honors, 6 = High Pass, 3-5 = Pass, and 1-2 = Fail "effectively stratified the class into the top quartile, middle 50%, and bottom quartile, respectively," with an R=0.71. While the system in place starting August 1st, 2013 is a new 5-point rubric and not a 7-point one, the committee believes that this information showed the ability to effectively translate our point scale into a 4-tier system.
Based on all of the information outlined above, here are the recommendations of the Grading Task Force of the Medical Education Committee (MEC):
Broad Goal:
"Adopting a 4-tier system of Honor/High Pass/Pass/Fail grading in the clinical clerkships and electives, and provide comparison data as a par of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) with the goal of improving grading transparency for students and residency programs."
Individual Recommendations:
1. Move to 4-point grading system (Honors, High Pass, Pass, and Fail) in 3rd and 4th years
2. Final evaluation grade will be comprised of clinical and exam performance
3. There should be a clear spell out in the MSPE of clinical and exam performance separately.
(THESE 3 ISSUES ABOVE are the individual aspects of grading changes that the FEC has yet to adopt and wants to hear YOUR opinion about)
b) Who will they affect?
These changes would only come into affect for the next incoming class of students (c/o 2018-hopefully or 2019). It would not affect any current students as we were all recruited and accepted to UCLA under the agreement that we would be evaluated on a purely Pass/No Pass system.
(3) How will the changes play out (what are the next steps)?
Again: The FEC wants to hear what students have to say, so come to the the upcoming forums on October 22nd and October 29th to voice your opinion in favor or against these changes. They will use this feedback to directly impact if they accept, decline or modify the proposed cirricular changes.
Thanks for getting through that long page! Hopefully you found it informative and useful background information in preparation for the forums. One of the key ways we garnered the ability to influence curriculum is by having a lot of our students engaged in these types of discussions and asking important questions of our faculty.