LETTER
Developing and Rewarding Good Teachers
Stephen Sandroni, MD
15 March 1994 | Volume 120 Issue 6 | Page 526
TO THE EDITOR:
In their analysis of medical student essays on the attractiveness of internal medicine, McMurray and colleagues [1] describe negative student-faculty relationships as the Socratic method "gone awry." The litany of complaints about attending physicians and their teaching techniques is neither new nor surprising to close observers of academic internal medicine. It does speak volumes about the failure to seriously evaluate and reward excellence in faculty teaching. Deletion of "malignant" attendings should be an ongoing function of a concerned administration and not a response to chronic student observations. Because of our failure to provide leadership, students have devalued us. We should not expect better until we are prepared to put our best teachers on the front lines and reward them well enough to stay there. Recognition, development, and retention of committed and talented teachers who can help our students find the rewards of contemporary internal medicine must be an institutional priority. Ample literature exists regarding the qualities of good medical teachers. Perhaps we need some practice guidelines or a consensus conference to remind ourselves not so much what makes good teachers but rather what a concerned administration can do to ensure an adequate supply.
|
Author and Article Information
|
|---|
University of Florida Health Science Center; Jacksonville, FL 32209
1. McMurray J, Schwartz M, Genero N, Linzer M. The attractiveness of internal medicine: a qualitative analysis of the experiences of female and male medical students. Ann Intern Med. 1993; 119:812-8.
About Letters
The Editors welcome submissions for possible publication in the Letters section. Authors of letters should:
•Include no more than 300 words of text, three authors, and five references
•Type with double-spacing
•Send three copies of the letter, an authors' form signed by all authors, and a cover letter describing any conflicts of interest related to the contents of the letter.
Letters commenting on an Annals article will be considered if they are received within 6 weeks of the time the article was published. Only some of the letters received can be published. Published letters are edited and may be shortened; tables and figures are included only selectively. Authors will be notified that the letter has been received. If the letter is selected for publication, the author will be notified about 3 weeks before the publication date. Unpublished letters cannot be returned.
Annals welcomes electronically submitted letters.
Top
Author & Article Info
REFERENCE
Article
