What should we be selecting for? A systematic approach for determining which personal characteristics to assess for during admissions

BMC Medical Education

Susan Sabatini¹  Kent Hecker²  Peter Conlon¹ 

[1] Dean’s Office, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada;G380 Health Sciences Centre, 3330 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 4N1, Canada

关键词: Survey;    Selection criteria;    Admissions;    Personal characteristics;   

Others  :  1153200
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6920-12-105

 received in 2011-11-14, accepted in 2012-10-25,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Admission committees are responsible for creating fair, defensible, reliable, and valid processes that assess those attributes considered important for professional success. There is evidence for the continuing use of academic ability as a selection criterion for health professional schools; however, there is little evidence for the reliability and validity of measures currently in place to assess personal characteristics. The Ontario Veterinary College (OVC) initiated a review of its admissions criteria in order to implement an evidence-based method to determine which characteristics veterinary stakeholders consider important to assess for admission.

Methods

Eleven characteristics were identified by the OVC Admissions Committee and a survey was sent to all licensed veterinarians in Ontario (n=4,068), OVC students (n=450), and OVC faculty, interns and residents (n=192). A paired comparison method was used to identify the relative rank order of the characteristics, and multivariate analysis of variance with post hoc analyses was used to determine between group differences in the returned survey data.

Results

Surveys were returned from 1,312 participants (27.86% response rate; female 59.70%). The relative rank of the characteristics was reasonably consistent among participant groups, with ethical behaviour, sound judgment, communication, and critical and creative thinking being ranked as the top four. However, the importance of certain characteristics like communication and empathy were perceived differently by groups. For instance, females scored communication (F(1, 1289) = 20.24, p < .001, d = .26) and empathy (F(1, 1289) = 55.41, p < .001, d = 0.42) significantly higher than males, while males scored knowledge of profession (F(1, 1289) = 12.81, p < .001, d = 0.20), leadership (F(1, 1289) = 10.28, p = .001, d = 0.18), and sound judgment (F(1, 1289) = 13.56, p < .001, d = 0.21) significantly higher than females.

Conclusions

The data from the paired comparison method provide convergent evidence for the characteristics participant groups identify as most important in determining who should be admitted to a veterinary program. The between group analyses provides important information regarding characteristics most important to various subgroups; this has implications for what characteristics are selected for at admission as well as on who is selecting for them.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Conlon et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Lloyd JW, King LJ, Klausner JS, Harris D: National workshop on core competencies for success in the veterinary profession. J Vet Med Educ 2003, 30:280-284.
• [2]Pew N, Veterinary Education Program Institute of Policy Sciences and Public Affairs: Future directions for veterinary medicine. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University; 1988.
• [3]Brown JP, Silverman JS: The current and future market for veterinarians and veterinary medical services in the United States. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999, 215:161-183.
• [4]Ilgen DR, Lloyd JW, Morgeson FP, Johnson MD, Meyer CJ, Marrinan M: Personal characteristics, knowledge of the veterinary profession, and influences on career choice among students in the veterinary school applicant pool. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003, 223:1587-1594.
• [5]Guernsey G, Doig P, Fretz P, McKelvey D: Veterinary medicine in Canada:Opportunity for renewal. Can Vet J 1998, 39:407-409.
• [6]Lewis RE, Klausner JS: Nontechnical competencies underlying career success as a veterinarian. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003, 222:1690-1696.
• [7]Albanese M, Snow M, Skochelak S, Huggett K, Farrell P: Assessing personal qualities in medical school admissions. Acad Med 2003, 78:313-321.
• [8]Hecker K, Donnon T, Fuentealba C, Hall D, Illanes O, Morck DW, et al.: Assessment of applicants to the veterinary curriculum using a multiple mini-interview method. J Vet Med Educ 2009, 36:166-173.
• [9]Veterinary medical college application service website college descriptor pages. http://www.aavmc.org/College-Specific-Requirements/College-Specific-Requirements_College-Specifications.aspx webcite
• [10]Reiter H, Eva KW: Reflecting the relative values of community, faculty, and students in the admissions tools of medical school. Teach Learn Med 2005, 17:4-8.
• [11]Lambe P, Bristow D: What are the most important non-academic attributes of good doctors? A Delphi survey of clinicians. Med Teach 2010, 32:E347-E354.
• [12]Prideaux D, Roberts C, Eva K, Centeno A, Mccrorie P, et al.: Assessment for selection for the health care professions and specialty training: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach 2011, 33:215-223.
• [13]Canadian Veterinary Medical Association: National action plan developed for the future of the profession. Can Vet J 1999, 40:699-704.
• [14]Ontario Veterinary College: Professional competencies of Canadian veterinarians: a basis for curriculum development DVM 2000. Guelph: University of Guelph; 2000.
• [15]Herbert AD: The method of paried comparisions. New York: Oxford University Press; 1988.
• [16]Streiner DL, Norman G: Health measurement scales - a practical guide to their development and use. 4th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
• [17]Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ: Applied mutlivariate research: design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications Inc; 2006.
• [18]Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for behavioral sciences. 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum; 1988.
• [19]College of Veterinarians of Ontario: 2009 CVO Classification Coding. 2010. Accessed Aug 31, 2010
• [20]Sorge US, Mount J, Kelton DF, Godkin A: Veterinarians’ perspective on a voluntary Johne’s disease prevention program in Ontario and western Canada. Can Vet J 2010, 51:403-405.
• [21]Osborne D: The relationship between associate compensation and provincial population. Can Vet J 2011, 52:84-87.
• [22]Susan S: personal correspondence with Darren Osborne, Director of Economic Research. Ontario: Veterinary Medical Association; 2009. Aug 24
• [23]Donnon T, Paolucci E, Violato C: The predictive validity of the MCAT for medical school performance and medical board licensing examinations: a meta-analysis of the published research. Acad Med 2007, 82:100-106.
• [24]Hecker K, Violato C: A generalizability analysis of a veterinary school Multiple Mini Interview: Effect of number of interviewers, type of interviewers and number of stations. Teach Learn Med 2011, 23:331-336.
• [25]Eva KW, Reiter HI, Rosenfeld J, Norman GR: The ability of the multiple mini-interview to predict preclerkship performance in medical school. Acad Med 2004, 79:S40-S42.
• [26]Hyde JS: The gender similarities hypothesis. Am Psychol 2005, 60:581-592.
• [27]Crossley J, Johnson G, Booth J, Wade W: Good questions, good answers: construct alignment improves the performance of workplace-based assessment scales. Med Educ 2011, 45:560-569.