The do’s, don’ts and don’t knows of redressing differential attainment related to race/ethnicity in medical schools

Author:

Fyfe Molly,Horsburgh Jo,Blitz Julia,Chiavaroli Neville,Kumar Sonia,Cleland JenniferORCID

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Systematic and structural inequities in power and privilege create differential attainment whereby differences in average levels of performance are observed between students from different socio-demographic groups. This paper reviews the international evidence on differential attainment related to ethnicity/race in medical school, drawing together the key messages from research to date to provide guidance for educators to operationalize and enact change and identify areas for further research. Methods Authors first identified areas of conceptual importance within differential attainment (learning, assessment, and systems/institutional factors) which were then the focus of a targeted review of the literature on differential attainment related to ethnicity/race in medical education and, where available and relevant, literature from higher education more generally. Each author then conducted a review of the literature and proposed guidelines based on their experience and research literature. The guidelines were iteratively reviewed and refined between all authors until we reached consensus on the Do’s, Don’ts and Don’t Knows. Results We present 13 guidelines with a summary of the research evidence for each. Guidelines address assessment practices (assessment design, assessment formats, use of assessments and post-hoc analysis) and educational systems and cultures (student experience, learning environment, faculty diversity and diversity practices). Conclusions Differential attainment related to ethnicity/race is a complex, systemic problem reflective of unequal norms and practices within broader society and evident throughout assessment practices, the learning environment and student experiences at medical school. Currently, the strongest empirical evidence is around assessment processes themselves. There is emerging evidence of minoritized students facing discrimination and having different learning experiences in medical school, but more studies are needed. There is a pressing need for research on how to effectively redress systemic issues within our medical schools, particularly related to inequity in teaching and learning.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Education

Reference174 articles.

1. Tajfel H. Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press; 1978.

2. Davis L, Museus S. What is deficit thinking? An analysis of conceptualizations of deficit thinking and implications for scholarly research. Currents. 2019. https://doi.org/10.3998/currents.17387731.0001.110.

3. Paton M, Naidu T, Wyatt T, et al. Dismantling the master’s house: new ways of knowing for equity and social justice in health professions education. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2020;25:1107–26.

4. Wong S, Gishen F, Lokugamage A. ‘Decolonising the Medical Curriculum’: Humanising medicine through epistemic pluralism, cultural safety and critical consciousness. Lond Rev Educ. 2021;19:1–22.

5. Chiavaroli N, Blitz J, Cleland J. When I say …. diversity. Med Educ. 2020;54:876–7.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3