Article 2018

Using complexity theory to guide medical school evaluations

Academic Medicine
Journal · Vol. 93 · Issue 3 · pp. 399-405
Abstract

Contemporary medical school evaluations are narrow in focus and often do not consider the wider systems implications of the relationship between learning and teaching, research, clinical care, and community engagement. The result is graduates who lack the necessary knowledge and skills for the modern health care system and an educational system that is limited in its ability to learn and change. To address this issue, the authors apply complexity theory to medical school evaluation, using four key factors-nesting, diversity, self-organization, and emergent outcomes. To help medical educators apply this evaluation approach in their own settings, the authors offer two tools-a modified program logic model and sensemaking. In sensemaking, they use the organic metaphor of the medical school as a neuron situated within a complex neural network to enable medical educators to reframe the way they think about program evaluation. The authors then offer practical guidance for applying this model, including describing the example of addressing graduates' engagement in the health care system. The authors consider the input of teachers, the role of culture and curriculum, and the clinical care system in this example. Medical school evaluation is reframed as an improvement science for complex social interventions (medical school is such an intervention) in this model. With complexity theory's focus on emergent outcomes, evaluation takes on a new focus, reimagining medical students as reaching their future potential as change agents, who transform health systems and the lives of patients. © 2017 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Keywords

Author Keywords

Not provided

Index Keywords

learning human medical education procedures Humans curriculum Literature Systems analysis medical school program evaluation Education, Medical Schools, Medical health care delivery Delivery of Health Care standards trends system analysis nonbiological model Models, Organizational nerve cell Metaphor Neurons
Author Affiliations
The University of Sydney School of Medicine, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Funding & Acknowledgements
No funding information
References 10 References
1 Holmboe, Eric S., Achieving the desired transformation: Thoughts on next steps for outcomes-based medical education, Academic Medicine, 90, 9, pp. 1215-1223, (2015)
2 Hodges, Brian D., Theory and practice in the design and conduct of graduate medical education, Academic Medicine, 87, 1, pp. 25-33, (2012)
3 Bowe, Constance M., Assessment for Systems Learning: A Holistic Assessment Framework to Support Decision Making Across the Medical Education Continuum, Academic Medicine, 92, 5, pp. 585-592, (2017)
4 Frye, Ann W., Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE Guide No. 67, Medical Teacher, 34, 5, pp. e288-e299, (2012)
5 Gerricy, Martha S., Evaluating change in medical school curricula: How did we know where we were going?, Academic Medicine, 73, 9, pp. S55-S59, (1998)
6 Castelo-Branco, Luís, Global sharing, local innovation: Four schools, four countries, one curriculum, Medical Teacher, 38, 12, pp. 1204-1208, (2016)
7 Mossop, Liz H., The curse of the teenage learner, Medical Education, 48, 3, pp. 231-233, (2014)
8 Newton, Bruce W., Is there hardening of the heart during medical school?, Academic Medicine, 83, 3, pp. 244-249, (2008)
9 Smith, Stephen R., AMEE guide No. 14: Outcome-based education: Part 2 - Planning, implementing and evaluating a competency-based curriculum, Medical Teacher, 21, 1, pp. 15-22, (1999)
10 Morcke, Anne Mette, Outcome (competency) based education: An exploration of its origins, theoretical basis, and empirical evidence, Advances in Health Sciences Education, 18, 4, pp. 851-863, (2013)
Quick Actions
Full Text via DOI
Citation Metrics
28
Times Cited (Scopus)

References 10
Document Identifiers