Minutes

WVRHEP Evaluation Committee

May 19, 2003

Members Present: Helen Baker, Jodie Jackson (Co-chair), Judy Koehler, Mike McCarthy, Ken Shannon, Sonnie Strader (Co-chair), Sheryll Tennant

Others present: Kathleen Bors, Michelle Kopf, Debra Riggs, Alicia Tyler, April Vestal

Members Absent: Nancy Dunn, Brenda Michael, Cindy Moats, Nancy Nedrow, Teresa Richmond

Kathleen Bors discussed with the Evaluation Committee the plan for each RHEP committee to address the Visions Document goals that apply to the Evaluation Committee and give feedback to the Community Outreach Committee by July 11. They requested a point person be selected to spearhead this for the Eval. Committee. Jodie Jackson volunteered to be the point person and Sonnie Strader and Helen Baker agreed to review what Jodie puts together for the Visions Document.

The Evaluation Committee discussed the revisions to The Definition of Type of Student and Minimum Requirements for WVRHEP Student Status (Policy 98-02) developed by the subcommittee appointed by the School committee to draft the revisions (subcommittee: Robert Blake, Patti Crawford, Jodie Jackson, Alicia Tyler and April Vestal). Mike McCarthy suggested that, since the new proposed Definition of Type of Student primarily defines RHEP student status as a rotation with an RHEP preceptor, that a notation be added stating that RHEP preceptors cannot be in a forbidden city. {Note some exceptions, such as Health Right Clinics, apply]. Helen Baker suggested that footnote #4 (“This designation [“other rural”] should only be used by schools under their consortium (i.e., WVSOM consortium, WVU consortium, MU consortium)” be reworded to be clear to anyone who reads it. Jodie will work on this.

The Evaluation Committee discussed SERFE questions targeted for possible elimination by an Evaluation subcommittee (Helen Baker, Jodie Jackson, Ken Shannon and Sheryll Tennant). The subcommittee has long thought that the SERFE was too long and had as a goal to review questions after enough data had been collected to see if much was being learned from each question. Mike McCarthy said that he can program TRACKER to record the number of students who access a SERFE but don’t complete it. This might give us an idea of how overwhelming the SERFE is to students if we assume that students don’t complete it or submit the SERFE due to its length. After much discussion, Helen Baker moved to eliminate the following questions: Question 8.g., 8.h., 8.i. (how often do you and how much educational value to you attribute to seeing patients in the emergency room, seeing patients on hospital rounds, and seeing patients on call). These questions were selected for elimination because it is a small percentage of students who participate in these activities while on RHEP rotation. Sheryll Tennant seconded this motion.

Judy Koehler moved to utilize the change in wording of Question 9.i. suggested by Michelle Kopf. This will now be worded “participate in a community service/service learning activity that had a health-related focus”. Sheryll Tennant seconded this motion.

Ken Shannon moved to delete questions 10.a. and 10.b. (evaluating the importance of and ability to a) Practice quality clinical health care and b) stay current in your field) due to the fact that the vast majority of students (as expected) rate the activity as very important. Sonnie Strader seconded Dr. Shannon’s motion.

The Evaluation Committee also decided to change the wording of Question 12 of the SERFE and Question 5 of the Baseline Data questionnaire to read “How likely are you to work in West Virginia after training?” instead of “How likely are you to live and work in West Virginia after training?”

Mike McCarthy brought to the attention of the committee that it might be helpful for faculty to view the frequency of an activity next to the value attributed to that activity in bar chart format. This is not presently done when bar chart analysis is done. Helen Baker suggested that a formal review of evaluation data (bar charts) be conducted on Faculty Development Day, September 20. Michelle Kopf said that she could bring this up at the next Faculty Development meeting, June 20.

The new dental Baseline Data Questionnaire and SERFE were reviewed. Helen Baker moved to accept dentistry forms as submitted to the Evaluation Committee with the following exceptions:

1. Secondary to Mike McCarthy’s recommendation, Question 1 of the Dental Baseline Data Questionnaire should not have WV as a default because, if a student skips that part of the question, his/her state will be listed as WV even though it may not be. It is better to have a blank than a wrong answer.
2. Secondary to Ken Shannon’s request, Question 1 of the Baseline Data Questionnaire should keep the question, “Is this rural?” because it gives the opportunity to match the student’s perception with reality and it is a quick and dirty way to look at the rural issue.
3. The Evaluation Committee would like the Dental SERFE to keep Question 10.c., (From the following list of skills, indicate your current level of confidence in performing each and how important you feel each skill is for a successful rural practitioner: Use computers to answer a specific clinical question.)

Sheryll Tennant seconded Helen Baker’s motion.

There was no time at this meeting to address items 5 and 6 on the agenda These will be on the agenda of the July meeting.