Objective: To fulfill the need for gynecologic teaching associates for an expanded pelvic examination module for third-year medical students, we sought women who were able to provide feedback to medical students. Oocyte donors were hypothesized as a useful potential pool of gynecologic teaching associates. Methods: Gynecologic teaching associates were recruited from a pool of women who were involved in our oocyte donor program. Students were evaluated on a scale of 1 (best) to 5 (worst) on their performance on the pelvic examination by themselves (n = 91), by the gynecologic teaching associate (n = 10), and by the supervising faculty (n = 6). Students were shown their evaluations, and these were reviewed at the end of the session to provide students with immediate feedback. Results: Students consistently ranked their skills lower than either the gynecologic teaching associate or supervising faculty member for all four categories evaluated (communication skills, technical skills, professional demeanor, and overall performance) (P < .001). Students gave their communications skills the highest mean rankings, whereas gynecologic teaching associates gave them the lowest. The highest correlation and agreement between pairs of evaluators were between the gynecologic teaching associate and the supervising faculty member. Gynecologic teaching associates and faculty members also were more likely to praise the students' performance in written comments (x2 58.2, P < .001), whereas no student found anything praiseworthy in his or her performance. Conclusion: Oocyte donors represent a useful pool of potential gynecologic teaching associates. They provide important feedback to students. Their evaluation of the proficiency of the student correlates well with that of the supervising faculty member. (ObstetGynecol 1999;93:94-9.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Obstetrics and Gynecology