Department of Internal Medicine

End of Clerkship Evaluation

NAME

Rotation: 

Note:  Please include comments!!

 

WARDS ( select one): MMC     SJH

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of resident teaching

  • Quality of attending teaching

  • Quality of feedback given

  • Adequate number of patients?

  • Variety of patients seen?

  • Did you become part of the team?

Comments or Suggestions:

SUBSPECIALTY PRECEPTORSHIPS

         

        

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of Teaching

  • Quality of Feedback Given

  • Adequate Number of Patients?

  • Variety of Patients Seen

  • Organization of this Subspecialty

Comments or Suggestions:

      

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of Teaching

  • Quality of Feedback Given

  • Adequate Number of Patients?

  • Variety of Patients Seen

  • Organization of this Subspecialty

Comments or Suggestions:

    

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of Teaching

  • Quality of Feedback Given

  • Adequate Number of Patients?

  • Variety of Patients Seen

  • Organization of this Subspecialty

Comments or Suggestions:

WARD REPORT

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of faculty teaching and involvement

  • Quality of feedback given

  • Overall educational value of sessions

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

CLINICAL CASE QUESTION REPORT

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Educational value of these sessions

  • To what degree did these sessions enhance your knowledge of how to put Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) into practice

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

WEEK 1

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Critical incident teaching session (anaphylaxis)

  • Critical incident teaching session (pancreatitis)

  • Sign-out case session

  • Clinical Skills Teaching Session (Cardiovascular and Eye exams)

  • Case review session

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

CLINICAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of faculty teaching -- Dr. Varney

  • Quality of faculty teaching -- Dr. Constance

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

NOON SEMINARS

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Topic selection

  • Quality of teaching

  • Educational value of these sessions

  • Quality of delivery format

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

SIMPLE CASES

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Topic selection

  • Educational value of these cases

  • Quality of delivery format

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

CORE RADIOLOGY CASES

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Educational value of these cases

  • Quality of delivery format

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

NURSE EDUCATOR

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of nurse educator

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

MENTORS

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of mentor teaching

  • Quality of mentoring

  • Quality of feedback given

  • Educational value of these sessions

  • To what degree did these sessions enhance your ability to focus on personal goals and areas for improvement?

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

GIM CLINIC

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  • Quality of attending teaching in GIM clinic

  • Quality of feedback given in GIM clinic

  • Adequate number of patients seen

  • Variety of patients seen

  • Organization of experience

Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

OTHER Comments OR SUGGESTIONS:

  1. What is your overall rating of this clerkship?

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

  1. What suggestions do you have to improve this learning experience for future years?

  1. What were the strengths of this clerkship?

  1. In this clerkship was an appropriate amount of time devoted to basic science concepts?  

Yes   No 

  1. Have you personally experienced or witnessed student abuse or mistreatment during this clerkship? 

Yes   No 

 

 If yes, briefly describe.

  1. Have you been directly observed performing clinical skills by faculty during this clerkship? 

Yes   No