Rules of Engagement: Residents' Perceptions of the In-training Evaluation Process

Christopher J. Watling, The University of Western Ontario
Cynthia F. Kenyon, The University of Western Ontario
Elaine M. Zibrowski, The University of Western Ontario
Valerie Schulz, The University of Western Ontario
Mark A. Goldszmidt, The University of Western Ontario
Indu Singh, The University of Western Ontario
Heather L. Maddocks, The University of Western Ontario
Lorelei Lingard, University of Toronto

Article comments

Dr. Lorelei Lingard is currently a faculty member at The University of Western Ontario.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In-training evaluation reports (ITERs) often fall short of their goals of promoting resident learning and development. Efforts to address this problem through faculty development and assessment-instrument modification have been disappointing. The authors explored residents' experiences and perceptions of the ITER process to gain insight into why the process succeeds or fails.

METHOD: Using a grounded theory approach, semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 residents. Constant comparative analysis for emergent themes was conducted.

RESULTS: All residents identified aspects of "engagement" in the ITER process as the dominant influence on the success of ITERs. Both external (evaluator-driven, such as evaluator credibility) and internal (resident-driven, such as self-assessment) influences on engagement were elaborated. When engagement was lacking, residents viewed the ITER process as inauthentic.

CONCLUSIONS: Engagement is a critical factor to consider when seeking to improve ITER use. Our articulation of external and internal influences on engagement provides a starting point for targeted interventions.