Oral examinations: actual and perceived contributions to surgery clerkship performance.

Abstract

Controversy persists regarding the validity, utility, and practicality of oral examinations. This study of a recent 3-year experience at the University of Michigan Medical School was undertaken to determine the value of the oral examination in the required junior year surgery clerkship. Multiple regression analysis of the relationship between the oral examination and ward grades, written examination grades, and the final grades for the clerkship years 1980 to 1981 (n = 198), 1981 to 1982 (n = 234), and 1982 to 1983 (n = 215) (classes of 1982, 1983, and 1984) revealed significant correlation between the oral examination and other evaluation parameters. Stepwise regression analysis revealed that the oral examination contributed unique information to final grade determination. Two surveys identified faculty and student opinion regarding the oral examination. The results were consistent during the 3-year period of study. Faculty and student opinion regarding the examination as an evaluation process and motivational device were positive, as was opinion regarding the breadth and depth of knowledge tested and the examination as a learning experience and an accurate reflection of students' performance. Both faculty and students agreed that the examination was worth the time and effort invested by faculty, was an appropriate evaluation process, and was a source of worthwhile faculty and student interaction.