Abstract
This paper examines the integration of non-academic assessments in medical school admissions and their impact on inclusive medical education in local and global contexts. These assessments, designed to gauge essential personal traits such as ethics, empathy, and interpersonal skills, are juxtaposed against traditional academic metrics in the admissions process. Situational judgment tests and, specifically, the Computer-Based Sampling of Personal Characteristics (CASPer) are highlighted. Through a review of the literature and case studies, these written and video-based non-academic assessments are analyzed with a focus on empathy. Findings from the research indicate that the predictive validity of these non-academic assessments is mixed. While such tests may offer deeper insights into candidates’ suitability for the medical profession, concerns persist about their cultural bias and fairness, especially in diverse local and international settings. This investigation highlights the variability in the adoption and perception of these tests across different educational systems and raises questions about their capability to assess candidates from varied cultural backgrounds equitably. While non-academic assessments can provide a more comprehensive view of medical school applicants, their current form necessitates rigorous evaluation and adaptation to ensure they support the principles of inclusive education. Such standardization would help minimize cultural biases and ensure that these tools are used effectively and fairly across different contexts, ultimately contributing to a more diverse and competent future medical workforce.
Presenters
Sakinah A. IsmaelStudent, Education Policy, Organization, and Leadership EdD, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, United States
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
KEYWORDS
Non-Academic Attribute Testing, Situational Judgement Tests, CASPer, Medical School Admissions
