Number
108
Name
What Matters Most? The Prioritization of Education Intervention Outcomes by Medical Educators
Date & Time
Sunday, June 7, 2026, 5:30 PM - 7:00 PM
Location Name
Oglethorpe Ballroom
Speakers
Authors
Charles Gu, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine
Alexandra Bayer, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine
Gustavo Patino, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine
Stefanie Attardi, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
Kyeorda Kemp, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
Sarah Lerchenfeldt, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
Tracey A.H. Taylor, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
David Thomas, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine
Presentation Topic(s)
Assessment
Description
PURPOSE
In order to design an effective medical education intervention, it is
important to understand which outcomes are valued by educators. There is a
gap in the literature relating to how medical educators prioritize outcomes
when evaluating the success of an educational intervention. This study
focused on quantifying the importance placed on education objectives like
performance metrics and student satisfaction.
METHODS
An international survey was circulated to undergraduate medical educators.
Participants were instructed to distribute 100 points to 6 categories related
to the outcome of an educational intervention on a course. These categories
included 1) improving average summative assessment scores, 2) increasing percentage
of high-scoring students, 3) reducing percentage of students receiving
failing scores, 4) score changes in a national licensing exam, 5) percentile
change in student satisfaction in a national survey of graduates, 6) change
in end-of-course evaluation Likert score. Points represented the perceived
importance that educators attributed to each outcome.
RESULTS
115 medical educators across 41 countries completed the survey. The highest
average point values were assigned to an increased class average score (mean
(SD): 21.94 (15.97)) and a reduced percentage of students receiving failing
scores (21.45 (16.41)). The outcomes with the fewest points allocated were
students' satisfaction in institutional (11.61 (8.58)) and national evaluations
(12.53 (8.81)), along with an increase in the number of students with higher
scores in a summative assessment (12.47 (8.26)).
CONCLUSIONS
From the results, educators value outcomes based on performance as an
indicator of an intervention’s success. In addition, ensuring minimal
competence among students seemed more important than increasing the
percentage of trainees with higher performance. Understanding these values
can help guide the creation of future intervention strategies and show which
outcomes should be highlighted when evaluating innovations in medical
education.
In order to design an effective medical education intervention, it is
important to understand which outcomes are valued by educators. There is a
gap in the literature relating to how medical educators prioritize outcomes
when evaluating the success of an educational intervention. This study
focused on quantifying the importance placed on education objectives like
performance metrics and student satisfaction.
METHODS
An international survey was circulated to undergraduate medical educators.
Participants were instructed to distribute 100 points to 6 categories related
to the outcome of an educational intervention on a course. These categories
included 1) improving average summative assessment scores, 2) increasing percentage
of high-scoring students, 3) reducing percentage of students receiving
failing scores, 4) score changes in a national licensing exam, 5) percentile
change in student satisfaction in a national survey of graduates, 6) change
in end-of-course evaluation Likert score. Points represented the perceived
importance that educators attributed to each outcome.
RESULTS
115 medical educators across 41 countries completed the survey. The highest
average point values were assigned to an increased class average score (mean
(SD): 21.94 (15.97)) and a reduced percentage of students receiving failing
scores (21.45 (16.41)). The outcomes with the fewest points allocated were
students' satisfaction in institutional (11.61 (8.58)) and national evaluations
(12.53 (8.81)), along with an increase in the number of students with higher
scores in a summative assessment (12.47 (8.26)).
CONCLUSIONS
From the results, educators value outcomes based on performance as an
indicator of an intervention’s success. In addition, ensuring minimal
competence among students seemed more important than increasing the
percentage of trainees with higher performance. Understanding these values
can help guide the creation of future intervention strategies and show which
outcomes should be highlighted when evaluating innovations in medical
education.
Presentation Tag(s)
Student Presentation