Medical Education? (1 Viewer)

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19334127-23289,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19336105-12332,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19301799-12332,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19324106-12332,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19288945-12332,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19344347-21223,00.html

Food for thought..

this issue comes up everytime a big Go8 uni med school applys the UMAT/Interview process...

but they usually stir ppl up..

 

[inasero]

i don't know when it comes to medical selection im inclined to sit on the fence. On the one hand yes it does gauge to a certain degree the students' key domains of attitudes, skills and knowledge. However, whether medical admissions interviews can ever fully be free of bias is another matter. On top of that yes, it's not completely impossible for students to lie in their interviews. In fact I know of at least one person who recevied assistance for their interviews and fabricated lies in order to gain an advantage.

I wasn't personally aware of subtle or overt discrimination policies against any particular group and I'm sure that such practices would be unconstitutional. I've been to three interviews and never encountered socioeconomic or ideological profiling. However if what the articles are saying is true (i.e. questions regarding opinions on Gay marriage and the Iraq War), we need to take a really close look at how interviewers manage conflicting opinions and consider how the student articulates and justifies their response (which in my opinion is the rationale of the interview process anyway).

At the end of the day, if it could be shown that:
1) there was a standardised method of gauging performance in the interview;
2) there was consistency amongst interviewers;
3) discrimination did not factor into the equation;
4) medical schools produced superior graduands to the old system (solely on basis of academic merit);
5) there would be some way of validating the claims of students in the interviews (e.g. through supporting documentation), thereby making it harder to lie...

then I would unequivocably give support to the current system. In principle I agree with the system, but as of yet I think there are alot of questions which need to be answered and medical schools as a whole need to clearly justify why they are using the system and earn the confidence of the community that their system adhered to the above five proposed criteria.

 

[black_raven777]

I personally like the interview system:

Some people seem upset about these questions relating to the Iraq war and in-vitro fertilization for lesbian couples. I think people shouldn't start criticising this line of questioning unless they know what its looking for.

Another example was "how would you treat a cancer patient" question. The interviewees could hardly be looking for a "right" answer. I feel they would just be looking for an answer that shows compassion and empathy towards the wishes of the patient and her family.