A multi-site study on medical school selection, performance, motivation and engagement

A. Wouters*, G. Croiset, N. R. Schripsema, J. Cohen-Schotanus, G. W. G. Spaai, R. L. Hulsman, R. A. Kusurkar

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)
324 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Medical schools seek ways to improve their admissions strategies, since the available methods prove to be suboptimal for selecting the best and most motivated students. In this multi-site cross-sectional questionnaire study, we examined the value of (different) selection procedures compared to a weighted lottery procedure, which includes direct admission based on top pre-university grade point averages (ae8 out of 10; top-pu-GPA). We also considered whether students had participated in selection, prior to being admitted through weighted lottery. Year-1 (pre-clinical) and Year-4 (clinical) students completed standard validated questionnaires measuring quality of motivation (Academic Self-regulation Questionnaire), strength of motivation (Strength of Motivation for Medical School-Revised) and engagement (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-Student). Performance data comprised GPA and course credits in Year-1 and clerkship performance in Year-4. Regression analyses were performed. The response rate was 35% (387 Year-1 and 273 Year-4 students). Top-pu-GPA students outperformed selected students. Selected Year-1 students reported higher strength of motivation than top-pu-GPA students. Selected students did not outperform or show better quality of motivation and engagement than lottery-admitted students. Participation in selection was associated with higher engagement and better clerkship performance in Year-4. GPA, course credits and strength of motivation in Year-1 differed between students admitted through different selection procedures. Top-pu-GPA students perform best in the medical study. The few and small differences found raise questions about the added value of an extensive selection procedure compared to a weighted lottery procedure. Findings have to be interpreted with caution because of a low response rate and small group sizes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)447-462
Number of pages16
JournalAdvances in Health Sciences Education
Volume22
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May-2017

Keywords

  • Academic performance
  • Admissions
  • Engagement
  • Medical school
  • Medical students
  • Motivation
  • Selection
  • Self-determination theory
  • STUDENTS
  • EDUCATION
  • APPLICANTS
  • CLERKSHIPS
  • ADMISSIONS
  • BURNOUT

Cite this