Alexander A Iyer, Cameron Hayes, Bernard S Chang, Susan E Farrell, Anne Fladger, Karen E Hauer, Richard M Schwartzstein
{"title":"医学院应该分级还是通过/不及格?概念论证和实证数据的范围审查。","authors":"Alexander A Iyer, Cameron Hayes, Bernard S Chang, Susan E Farrell, Anne Fladger, Karen E Hauer, Richard M Schwartzstein","doi":"10.1097/ACM.0000000000006085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Medical school grading has implications for student well-being, motivation, equity, and residency selection. However, despite more than 50 years of debate, there remains no consensus on whether grading should be tiered or pass/fail, particularly in core clerkships. This scoping review examines conceptual arguments, empirical data, and knowledge gaps regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in medical school.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>OVID MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC were searched on November 15, 2023, for articles published from 2000 to 2023 focused on (1) conceptual arguments regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in U.S. medical schools and/or (2) empirical data relevant to this debate. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility. The authors performed meta-synthesis to group arguments into domains and cross-reference them with relevant data, appraising empirical studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty articles met the inclusion criteria, including 22 empirical studies of variable quality (MERSQI scores, 8.5-13.5 of 18). Conceptual arguments and empirical data spanned 10 domains. Better-supported arguments included the association of pass/fail preclerkship grading with improved short-term well-being and preserved academic performance, low reliability of individual tiered grades, and racial and ethnic disparities in clerkship grading. Areas of uncertainty included the effects of pass/fail clerkship grading on well-being, motivation, learning, and achievement; potential stress displacement with pass/fail grading; validity of tiered clerkship grades; residency application concerns; and subinternship grading considerations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant controversy about grading exists across 10 domains. Cross-cutting challenges include the diverse purposes of grading leading to conflicting opinions and data interpretations, limited study quality, and overreliance on opinion over data or theory. Recommendations include caution when interpreting small numbers of tiered grades, transparency and research regarding potential clerkship grading disparities, and consideration of all relevant dimensions in system-level assessment approaches. The authors hope these steps encourage assessment that benefits learners and patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50929,"journal":{"name":"Academic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Should Medical School Grading Be Tiered or Pass/Fail? A Scoping Review of Conceptual Arguments and Empirical Data.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander A Iyer, Cameron Hayes, Bernard S Chang, Susan E Farrell, Anne Fladger, Karen E Hauer, Richard M Schwartzstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/ACM.0000000000006085\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Medical school grading has implications for student well-being, motivation, equity, and residency selection. However, despite more than 50 years of debate, there remains no consensus on whether grading should be tiered or pass/fail, particularly in core clerkships. This scoping review examines conceptual arguments, empirical data, and knowledge gaps regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in medical school.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>OVID MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC were searched on November 15, 2023, for articles published from 2000 to 2023 focused on (1) conceptual arguments regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in U.S. medical schools and/or (2) empirical data relevant to this debate. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility. The authors performed meta-synthesis to group arguments into domains and cross-reference them with relevant data, appraising empirical studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty articles met the inclusion criteria, including 22 empirical studies of variable quality (MERSQI scores, 8.5-13.5 of 18). Conceptual arguments and empirical data spanned 10 domains. Better-supported arguments included the association of pass/fail preclerkship grading with improved short-term well-being and preserved academic performance, low reliability of individual tiered grades, and racial and ethnic disparities in clerkship grading. Areas of uncertainty included the effects of pass/fail clerkship grading on well-being, motivation, learning, and achievement; potential stress displacement with pass/fail grading; validity of tiered clerkship grades; residency application concerns; and subinternship grading considerations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant controversy about grading exists across 10 domains. Cross-cutting challenges include the diverse purposes of grading leading to conflicting opinions and data interpretations, limited study quality, and overreliance on opinion over data or theory. Recommendations include caution when interpreting small numbers of tiered grades, transparency and research regarding potential clerkship grading disparities, and consideration of all relevant dimensions in system-level assessment approaches. The authors hope these steps encourage assessment that benefits learners and patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Academic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000006085\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Academic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000006085","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:医学院评分对学生福利、动机、公平和住院医师选择有影响。然而,尽管争论了50多年,但对于是否应该分级或通过/不通过,特别是在核心职员职位上,仍然没有达成共识。这个范围审查检查概念上的争论,经验数据,和知识差距关于分级与通过/不及格评分在医学院。方法:于2023年11月15日检索OVID MEDLINE、Embase、Web of Science和ERIC,检索2000年至2023年发表的文章,重点关注(1)关于美国医学院分级与及格/不及格评分的概念争论和/或(2)与此辩论相关的经验数据。两名审稿人独立评估了资格。作者进行了元综合,将论点分组到不同的领域,并与相关数据交叉引用,使用医学教育研究研究质量工具(MERSQI)评估实证研究。结果:40篇文章符合纳入标准,其中22篇为可变质量实证研究(MERSQI评分为8.5-13.5分,共18篇)。概念论证和实证数据跨越了10个领域。更有证据支持的论点包括:通过/不通过职前评分与改善短期幸福感和保持学业成绩、个人分层评分的低可靠性以及职前评分中的种族和民族差异之间的联系。不确定的领域包括通过/不通过的职员等级对幸福感、动机、学习和成就的影响;具有合格/不合格等级的潜在应力位移;分层见习职系的有效性;居留权申请事宜;以及实习分级的考虑。结论:10个领域对分级存在显著争议。交叉挑战包括评分的不同目的导致意见和数据解释的冲突,有限的研究质量,以及过度依赖意见而不是数据或理论。建议包括在解释少量分层等级时要谨慎,对潜在的办事员等级差异进行透明度和研究,以及在系统级评估方法中考虑所有相关方面。作者希望这些步骤鼓励对学习者和患者有益的评估。
Should Medical School Grading Be Tiered or Pass/Fail? A Scoping Review of Conceptual Arguments and Empirical Data.
Purpose: Medical school grading has implications for student well-being, motivation, equity, and residency selection. However, despite more than 50 years of debate, there remains no consensus on whether grading should be tiered or pass/fail, particularly in core clerkships. This scoping review examines conceptual arguments, empirical data, and knowledge gaps regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in medical school.
Method: OVID MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and ERIC were searched on November 15, 2023, for articles published from 2000 to 2023 focused on (1) conceptual arguments regarding tiered versus pass/fail grading in U.S. medical schools and/or (2) empirical data relevant to this debate. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility. The authors performed meta-synthesis to group arguments into domains and cross-reference them with relevant data, appraising empirical studies using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI).
Results: Forty articles met the inclusion criteria, including 22 empirical studies of variable quality (MERSQI scores, 8.5-13.5 of 18). Conceptual arguments and empirical data spanned 10 domains. Better-supported arguments included the association of pass/fail preclerkship grading with improved short-term well-being and preserved academic performance, low reliability of individual tiered grades, and racial and ethnic disparities in clerkship grading. Areas of uncertainty included the effects of pass/fail clerkship grading on well-being, motivation, learning, and achievement; potential stress displacement with pass/fail grading; validity of tiered clerkship grades; residency application concerns; and subinternship grading considerations.
Conclusions: Significant controversy about grading exists across 10 domains. Cross-cutting challenges include the diverse purposes of grading leading to conflicting opinions and data interpretations, limited study quality, and overreliance on opinion over data or theory. Recommendations include caution when interpreting small numbers of tiered grades, transparency and research regarding potential clerkship grading disparities, and consideration of all relevant dimensions in system-level assessment approaches. The authors hope these steps encourage assessment that benefits learners and patients.
期刊介绍:
Academic Medicine, the official peer-reviewed journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, acts as an international forum for exchanging ideas, information, and strategies to address the significant challenges in academic medicine. The journal covers areas such as research, education, clinical care, community collaboration, and leadership, with a commitment to serving the public interest.