DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.12171369
title: “Global Rating Scale” in the Evaluation of the Academic Achievement of the Medical Student: a Wasted Opportunity

description: Abstract: Introduction: Having a medical degree is enough documentation for professional practice in most Brazilian states. In fact, the evaluation of academic achievement by medical schools is certainly the most important filter of professional proficiency. Thus, the use of appropriate assessment instruments is essential. Competence is the set of knowledge, skills and attitudes that enable a medical practice of excellence. Differently, Performance can be defined as what the individual actually produces in their daily lives. The internship is the best opportunity for the precise monitoring of the expected achievements of a student in training. When we evaluate competence, we seek to measure how much the student knows, conceives or performs procedures, in an objective evaluation context. Performance is what the individual effectively uses of their skills. There is, therefore, a greater difficulty in evaluating performance, since motivation, discipline, physical and psychic conditions, as well as other experiential aspects are involved. In addition, continuous assessment is required, which implies close monitoring. The “Global Rating Scale” (GRS) is one of the modalities that allows, despite its subjectivity, evaluating the performance of the intern student. For that purpose, it is strategic that it be constructed through standardized nomenclature, defined parameters that allow the quantification, considering the differences between several pedagogical political projects. Due to the heterogeneity of the different settings of the practice of medicine, and the large number of subjects involved, would the criteria established for the structuring of the GRS be properly standardized and adequate to evaluate medical internship students? Method: In this work, we study, through the teaching plans, how GRS is structured in the evaluation of students of an institution regarding practical activities, and what can be improved and contribute to the knowledge on the subject. Results: We find that the GRS comprises 30% (fifth year) and 40% (sixth year) of the Student Global Rating (SGR), which corresponds to a single grade at the end of each graduation year and takes into account the performance and the workload of disciplines. Additionally, we evaluate the terms used as criteria to be used for the GRS. The analysis of the Teaching Plans showed that the GRS was irregular and lacked institutional standardization among the Disciplines; there is an absence of uniformity regarding the composition of the final grade or in the criteria to be evaluated, as well as in the differentiated application of the items in each learning scenario. Conclusion: The lack of a uniform methodology precludes an overall student follow-up, including how much culture and institutional values could influence student performance. The opportunity to conduct an effectively constructive evaluation is lost. On the other hand, the GRS, considering its subjective nature, could, if properly applied, be a fundamental instrument for the dialogue between teachers and students in a formative evaluation. Thus, due to inadequate inclusion, within a summative evaluation, a great opportunity for development of the student, as well as of the institution, is wasted.