Policy Portal

Administrative Policy: Academic

COM – Standardized Scoring Policy for Modules

Policy Number: 3349-AC-429
Effective Date: 07/01/2020
Updated: 07/28/2020
Responsible Department: Office of the Dean, College of Medicine
Approval Authority: Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Responsible Office: Office of the Dean, College of Medicine

A. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to standardize the scoring structure for M1 modules.

B. Scope

This policy applies to the following modules in the M1 Curriculum Year for AY 20-21:  Population Health; Human Architecture and Composition; Cardiac, Pulmonary and Renal Systems; Gastroenteric, Reproductive and Endocrine Systems; Neurobiology; Pathogens and Defense; Integrated Case Experience.

C. Definitions

  1. Final Engaged Learning Score: Cumulative score of engaged learning activities (e.g., Peer Instruction, problem-based learning, case-based learning and others) in which the faculty has assigned a score
  2. Final Course Score: Overall total score that includes weighted scores from engaged learning activities, one or two institutionally developed exam(s) with multiple choice questions, and a customized NBME assessment.
  3. ICS: Introduction to Clinical Skills module.
  4. Module Dyad Leader: The appointed faculty members who are responsible for the overall design, conduct, student assessment within and evaluation of a credit-bearing module.
  5. NBME: National Board of Medical Examiners.
  6. PPC: Patient, Physician and Community module (1 and 2).

D. Policy Statement

  1. All modules in the M1 curriculum, with the exception of ICS and PPC, will calculate the Final Course Score using the following formula:
    1. Final Engaged Learning Score will comprise 20% of the Final Course Score.
      1. The majority of the Final Engaged Learning Score should come from Peer Instruction, unless the Module Dyad Leaders feel that other engaged learning activities should predominate.
        1. The Curriculum Committee must approve the grading structure of any module that Peer Instruction does not constitute the majority of the Final Engaged Learning Score. This approval must occur prior to the publication of the syllabus.
      2. Each Peer Instruction item is worth one (1) point.
        1. If the Module Dyad Leader chooses to score other engaged learning activities, then those scores should be equal to the average number of points awarded in a day of Peer Instruction.
      3. The Final Engaged Learning Score will be adjusted to exclude missed activities on Wellness Days (or excused absence days) as described in the College of Medicine Attendance at Instructional Sessions academic policy 3349-AC-418.
    2. Institutionally developed multiple choice questions will comprise 30% of the Final Course Score.
      1. In modules with two multiple choice exams, each exam will contribute 15% to the final score.
      2. Exams will be administered through Examsoft© or other approved testing software.
      3. The exam should include 50-75 items.
      4. Exams must be constructed with the goal of an average class score equal to 80% (+/- 5%).
      5. If more than 30% of the students score below 70% on the exam, the exam should be referred to the Curriculum Committee for evaluation.
    3. NBME Customized Assessment will comprise 50% of the Final Course Score.
      1. The length of the exam should be based on the length of the module as follows: for an 8-week module (120-150 items), 6-week (90-120 items), and 4- week (60-90 items).
      2. The overall exam difficulty (p-value) must equal 0.82, meaning that the expected NBME average score is 82%.
      3. If more than 20% of the students score below 70%, the exam should be referred to the Curriculum Committee for evaluation.
      4. Modules that plan to use a practical lab score as a substitute for a percent of the NBME should petition the Curriculum Committee for an exception.
    4. Any exception to the requirements described above must be approved by the Curriculum Committee before syllabus is published and the module starts.
  2. The grading structure for ICS and PPC (1 and 2) are developed separately by the Module Dyad Leaders and approved by the Curriculum Committee prior to the start of the module and publication of the syllabus.
  3. A student’s progress in a curriculum will not be adversely impacted due to technology malfunction. If a malfunction prevents the student from participating in a portion of a virtual peer instruction session, the student will immediately reach out to the module dyad leaders to inform them. The module dyad leaders will make appropriate adjustments to the student’s Final Engaged Learning Score. The curriculum committee will monitor technology issues so that adjustments can be made for persistent and pervasive concerns.


Lisa Noland
Administrative Specialist
Phone: 330.325.6354
Email: lnoland@neomed.edu

Office of General Counsel

Northeast Ohio Medical University