Abstract
Delineating those factors that enhance a student's surgical experience during medical school may be important to attracting “the best and the brightest” to surgery programs. Therefore, understanding the differences between an excellent and poor student evaluation from the student perspective is critical to surgical education, yet it remains ill defined. We concurrently assessed comprehensive student evaluations from a surgical clerkship over a 2-year period. The purpose of this study is to report the results of this audit. Two years of student-directed evaluations were analyzed. Nine different surgical services were evaluated. Twenty-six data points were collected, including demographic, career, objective, and subjective information. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive, χ2, and logistic regression tests. One hundred twenty-eight students rotated over 2 years, with 113 (88%) completing the assessment (61% men, 39% women). Men were more interested in surgical careers than women (4:1, P < 0.05). Medicine (22%) and surgical subspecialties (23%) were the most common career interests. Regression analysis demonstrated that age and gender were not predictors of outcome. The “highest rated and lowest rated” service were compared. Analysis demonstrated significant differences in three areas (operating room experience, and resident and faculty teaching.) The characteristics that separated the good teachers from the poor ones were the ability to challenge the student to think, providing useful feedback for their work, the ability to communicate ideas, and a positive attitude toward students/teaching. Student surgical evaluations underscore the role faculty and/or residents play in their education.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.