PRESENTATION 1 - Effects of Student Socioeconomic Status on Academic Benchmarks in Medical School    
Kencie Ely    
Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine at UNLV

PURPOSE The objective of this study was to determine if socioeconomic disadvantage status was correlated to lower MCAT scores and academic benchmarks in medical school. Students from lower socioeconomic groups have been shown to underestimate their ability to get accepted to medical school or be successful once accepted. Prior studies have shown that a higher socioeconomic disadvantage (SED) status resulted in lower NBME Step scores. However, more research is needed to determine if these are institution-specific issues or a nationwide problem.

METHODS Data for this study were drawn from institutional databases in accordance with an approved IRB protocol. The AAMC education/occupation (EO) indicator classifies applicants into five ordered groups. EO1 and EO2 are determined as economically disadvantaged, so we aggregated EO1 and EO2 status of KKSOM students. The disadvantaged groups were then compared to students with no financial disadvantage (using independent-sample t-tests) on the following test scores: MCAT, mean of all preclinical NBME subject exams, Step 1, mean of all clinical NBME subject exams, and Step 2.

RESULTS Medical students in the disadvantaged group were found to have significantly lower MCAT scores than their counterparts. The disadvantaged group showed a non-significant lower trend on all benchmarks until Step 2 at which point they were higher compared to their wealthier classmates.

CONCLUSION These results suggest that applicants from lower socioeconomic backgrounds who do poorly on the MCAT can be accepted with the expectation that they will catch up with other students. More multi-institutional wide studies need to be done to determine the generalizability of these findings.
 

PRESENTATION 2 - Casting a Wider Net: Increasing Inclusivity and Diversity in Faculty Searches    
Rachel Porter    
Duke University 

PURPOSE While calls to diversify the healthcare workforce have grown louder, many areas of medical education have not adequately responded. In 2018, only 3.6% of full-time medical school faculty were Black or African American, and only 5.5% were Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish Origin. A diverse healthcare workforce is associated with improved outcomes across the board. At the educational level, a diverse student body improves the learning of all students, and a diverse faculty is better able to support underrepresented students and build inclusive learning culture. This abstract presents one program's effort to conduct a more equitable faculty search and recruit candidates in alignment with the program's values of diversity, justice, equity, and inclusion.

METHODS A multi-faceted approach was taken to reduce bias and increase equity within a faculty search. Program leadership provided the search committee chair with this specific charge, and the process began with selection of a diverse committee membership. Members engaged in anti-bias training and bias checks became a standing item for all committee meetings, built into every step of the search. Strategies such as blinding CVs and creating a robust candidate evaluation rubric led to processes and tools that can be applied to future searches.

RESULTS The search resulted in 14 applicants, 4 interviewees, and 2 hires. Candidate feedback was positive and indicative of increased equity. Despite our best efforts to mitigate bias, we were unable to eliminate it, but we were able to identify and disrupt it. Several tools developed in our process represent successful outcomes that are already being applied to other hiring processes.

CONCLUSION Deliberate actions to address bias in academic processes is critical to promoting more diverse healthcare faculty, and building student pipelines that advance health equity.  While our interventions were limited to one faculty search process at one institution, there are important lessons that may be applied to hiring, admissions, and awards selection.
 

PRESENTATION 3 - Micro-lecture Educator Development Program using TED Masterclass: Cohort 2    
Kathleen Everling    
University of Texas Medical Branch 

PURPOSE Declining attendance for lectures may be attributed to excessive length, lack of engagement, and over-complexity of information. Medical students seemed to favor commercially-available resources which presented medical information in short, focused segments. Since students desire to also learn from internal faculty, we developed a curriculum to train health professions educators to create these short, focused presentations called micro-lectures. TED Masterclass was the primary learning resource.   

METHODS In 2020, the first cohort of 25 educators completed a 6-month program. Based on feedback, the curriculum was revised and shortened. Over 4 months, participants a) asynchronously completed 11 TED Masterclass lessons (short videos and associated activities) which focused on presentation and communication skills, b) engaged in monthly accountability sessions focusing on skill application and collegial dialogue, c) completed supplemental learning activities on Blackboard, and d) uploaded a recorded micro-lecture. Participants received constructive feedback on their micro-lecture from fellow participants and the program instructors. 

RESULTS In 2021, 38 interdisciplinary educators from 4 health professions schools at one institution participated in the second cohort with 25 successfully completing all lessons and 18 completing all required components of the program including submitting a recorded micro-lecture. Surveys indicated that participants felt confident in their ability to apply the TED skills and will continue to incorporate the skills in their teaching. Participants reported improvement in their presentations and their ability to create more focused lectures. All respondents indicated a commitment to change their instruction which included improved lecture quality with decreased lecture duration paired with active learning. These results are similar to the first cohort.  

CONCLUSION After implementing 2 cohorts and engaging with over 60 educators, we have valuable information from participants and through our own experiences to guide future curriculum development.