Got some negative comments on my evaluation.

[TJMAXX]

---

Members don't see this ad.

It was terrible to see all the negative comments on one of the services from one of the attendings. I didn't think I was acting that bad, since other attendings gave me fair evaluations.

Ok, my question is: for how long are these negative comments going to stick with me? Are these gonna be one of the documents for fellowship application, or for job application? Are they gonna be with me for my entire life??

Ooooooooh Gosh! I can not stopping thinking all these....help!

 

[MirkoCrocop]

It was terrible to see all the negative comments on one of the services from one of the attendings. I didn't think I was acting that bad, since other attendings gave me fair evaluations.

Ok, my question is: for how long are these negative comments going to stick with me? Are these gonna be one of the documents for fellowship application, or for job application? Are they gonna be with me for my entire life??

Ooooooooh Gosh! I can not stopping thinking all these....help!

No, from what I understand, those kinds of evaluations are just internal things. The only time they're ever used is because, for disciplinary action, the program needs things in writing. It's a long and hard process to take any action against a resident and it begins at the subjective monthly evaluation level.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean that's even what this attending has in mind. The attending is likely just wanting to push you a little. Not everyone can just get great evaluations every month or there wouldn't be any point of them.

Anyways, the only thing this does it make things slightly awkward with that attending and you may not what to ask that one for a letter of rec. Work to reverse his/her impression of you.

 

[2121115]

Look on the bright side.... Now you know who to NOT ask for a job reference.

IMO, if they don't have the balls to say it to your face then they shouldn't write it in an evaluation. If they don't give you face-to-face feedback they are cowards.

 

[pathstudent]

It was terrible to see all the negative comments on one of the services from one of the attendings. I didn't think I was acting that bad, since other attendings gave me fair evaluations.

Ok, my question is: for how long are these negative comments going to stick with me? Are these gonna be one of the documents for fellowship application, or for job application? Are they gonna be with me for my entire life??

Ooooooooh Gosh! I can not stopping thinking all these....help!

What you interpret as negative comments might just be things that the attending considers areas you need to work at. Use them as an opportunity to focus on what you can improve on.

 

[GlassPusherJack]

.

 

[KCShaw]

As a medical student, resident, or fellow?

Overall, I pretty much agree with previous posters. Don't read too much into these, and realize you're not going to have to wear them like a sign for the rest of your life. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your point of view, chances are that unless you're having chronic recurring "problems" with more than one person the only person reading all the evaluations is you, followed occasionally by your program director &/or program coordinator (who probably does little more than bury them in a file for that outside chance it will be needed for chronic problems).

You're likely to know just how "fair" the comments really were. Meanwhile you have a few things to focus on for the future, which generic "Nice job" comments are utterly useless for.

 

[TJMAXX]

Thanks for all your replies. I am currently a resident, and I am done with that service (AP) which a lot of people don't like ( no affense to people who love it ). I don't need any letter from that attending, beacuse I am not applying for that fellowship. Although I am not 100% sure who that person was, because it was anonymous, I am almost sure who that person was for some reasons. I am just a little disappointed about his hypocrisy, as he always gives me compliment, and never criticised me in real life. oh well, as long as these negative comments won't be my permanent lables, i am fine with it now. 🙄

 

[2121115]

Thanks for all your replies. I am currently a resident, and I am done with that service (AP) which a lot of people don't like ( no affense to people who love it ). I don't need any letter from that attending, beacuse I am not applying for that fellowship. Although I am not 100% sure who that person was, because it was anonymous, I am almost sure who that person was for some reasons. I am just a little disappointed about his hypocrisy, as he always gives me compliment, and never criticised me in real life. oh well, as long as these negative comments won't be my permanent lables, i am fine with it now. 🙄

What? It was an anonymous evaluation from an attending? How could that be helpful? I'm not even sure that meets ACGME standards for programs. Someone who would do that on an ANONYMOUS evaluation has no professionalism.

 

[TJMAXX]

Yes it was an ANONYMOUS evaluation from every attending in our program.😡

What? It was an anonymous evaluation from an attending? How could that be helpful? I'm not even sure that meets ACGME standards for programs. Someone who would do that on an ANONYMOUS evaluation has no professionalism.

 

[gbwillner]

Thanks for all your replies. I am currently a resident, and I am done with that service (AP) which a lot of people don't like ( no affense to people who love it ). I don't need any letter from that attending, beacuse I am not applying for that fellowship. Although I am not 100% sure who that person was, because it was anonymous, I am almost sure who that person was for some reasons. I am just a little disappointed about his hypocrisy, as he always gives me compliment, and never criticised me in real life. oh well, as long as these negative comments won't be my permanent lables, i am fine with it now. 🙄

I'm sure everything you do is perfect and need to make no adjustments. You should probably go ahead and take the boards now. Why waste more time with training?

 

[yaah]

Well, if you are getting only anonymous feedback without any personal feedback, this needs to be discussed with your program director. That is unhelpful if an attending face-to-face acts like everything is fine but then dings you on evals.

 

[KCShaw]

I couldn't find anything on the ACGME website (albeit on a very quick search) indicating faculty evaluations of trainees should or shouldn't be anonymous. Trainee evaluations of faculty, however, are supposed to be anonymous. Nothing like a little consistency.

I did stumble across some opinions suggesting that timely feedback is critical, and that anonymity works both ways -- some departments use trainee feedback of faculty for or against them, so some faculty have reason to want to offer feedback anonymously so trainees may feel less hard done by and thus perhaps less critical of faculty when their own evals roll around. Recognizing that anonymity has its problems, I pretty much ascribe to the concept that timely and pointed positive & negative feedback is more important than looking someone in the face and getting nothing out of it, if that was the only choice. Anonymity may not seem the most professional or manly approach, but if that's what it takes to hear what someone really thinks so I can better myself, and/or so I can feel more secure in offering a tough opinion, so be it.

 

[GlassPusherJack]

I couldn't find anything on the ACGME website (albeit on a very quick search) indicating faculty evaluations of trainees should or shouldn't be anonymous. Trainee evaluations of faculty, however, are supposed to be anonymous. Nothing like a little consistency.

I did stumble across some opinions suggesting that timely feedback is critical, and that anonymity works both ways -- some departments use trainee feedback of faculty for or against them, so some faculty have reason to want to offer feedback anonymously so trainees may feel less hard done by and thus perhaps less critical of faculty when their own evals roll around. Recognizing that anonymity has its problems, I pretty much ascribe to the concept that timely and pointed positive & negative feedback is more important than looking someone in the face and getting nothing out of it, if that was the only choice. Anonymity may not seem the most professional or manly approach, but if that's what it takes to hear what someone really thinks so I can better myself, and/or so I can feel more secure in offering a tough opinion, so be it.

we have it so that the attendings do not know which resident said what (they get anonymous evals in batches twice a year) but the residents can look online and see what attendings said. i think the reason for anonymity is so that residents arent afraid to express what they think as we have more to risk. why attendings aren't anonymous in their feedback to us, i don't know.

i don't see why a well-written anonymous eval would be any less help than a non-anonymous one as long as the good and bad comments are specific points and not general things.

 

[malchik]

I think evaluations of residents by attendings should be face to face, mano a mano. Online evaluations by attendings, anonymous or not, foster an environment of passive-aggressiveness, disingenuine interactions, and non-accountability, where a resident's reputation can be sullied without having to defend it. Stalinism.

 

[KluverB]

...where a resident's reputation can be sullied without having to defend it. Stalinism.

You mean, to be "defensive".

If you suck, you suck. What are you going to defend? Some folks just can't take criticism in any form. That's especially true in the medical field where everyone always gets honors and nothing but high praises on their evals, right? I have praised as well as (constructively) criticized folks to their faces. They gloat with the praising. They take offense to even the slightest amount of criticism. They get defensive. They start spewing all sorts of excuses. I have yet to have anyone thank me for "helping" them by pointing out a deficiency.

Anyhow, get used to it. Already on the web there are plenty of sites where patients, and God-knows who else, can go and rate physicians. Anonymously. Although, luckily, this does not affect pathologists, since we're not involved in direct patient care. However, conceivably, someone you cross in your daily interactions could go on line and write a scathing review of you as a pathologist, etc. etc. The choices to screw you over are limitless. Again, chances are no one is going to look for the rating on a pathologist... but then again, maybe they would...

 

[trudyfae]

TJMAXX,
My advice to you is to look at those comments and try to consider whether there is any validity to what is being said. I prefer to think the attendings only want to help; however, in my residency some of the attendings were malicious and either did not care or intentionally tried to be hurtful. If you think the comments are invalid, let them go. If you can learn from them and improve yourself, then do so. The fact that you are so concerned about the comments says to me that you are conscientious and care about your work and how you are perceived. I have been practicing for almost 7 years now, and the specific things my attendings in residency said have not been shown to anyone, only I remember them and try to be better because of them. It sucks, and not all attendings are nice or want the best for you. In pathology, it is really hard to know what a person is all about and how good they really are. Just work hard and learn all you can, because you will never know it all, not everyone will act professionally, and not everyone will like you.

And I think anonymous evaluations are useless.
Good luck.

 

[cjw0918]

Take what these people have said about you with a grain of salt. They may have their own agenda and could be slightly crazy themselves. Also consider that they might be right, and if you think so, make some changes. I had some downright nasty things said about me, and then I was asked to be chief resident. Um, no thanks. Residency will not last forever, and at times it's a lot like high school. Just when you think you can't take it anymore, you'll be done. 🙂

 

[yaah]

Take what these people have said about you with a grain of salt. They may have their own agenda and could be slightly crazy themselves. Also consider that they might be right, and if you think so, make some changes. I had some downright nasty things said about me, and then I was asked to be chief resident. Um, no thanks. Residency will not last forever, and at times it's a lot like high school. Just when you think you can't take it anymore, you'll be done. 🙂

I'm just curious - but people refer to "agendas" a lot. What possible agendas do faculty have? Why are faculty served by saying bad things about residents? It doesn't really make any sense, but I hear it all the time. "Dr X has an agenda against me because I am xxxx" why? It reflects on their program. If faculty had agendas, wouldn't it be more likely that they would overlook problems and overestimate capabilities?

I agree that poor evaluations can sometimes stem from faculty who don't care or don't really pay attention - but agendas?

 

[GlassPusherJack]

.

 

[malchik]

I can only guess as to faculty's motives. I tend to get positive evaluations with a few suggestions about how I could improve. Those are helpful. Then I got an evaluation where each of about 20 categories was scored 2 out of 5, with no text. Now if that were an honest evaluation, there would have been a mix, with some categories higher and lower than others. The only explanation I can come up with is that about a year prior to that I had mishandled a case leading to a delay in signout by one day, and it really pissed this guy off. Attendings, just like residents, can be petty and use evaluations to settle scores. It happens.

 

[zao275]

I can only guess as to faculty's motives. I tend to get positive evaluations with a few suggestions about how I could improve. Those are helpful. Then I got an evaluation where each of about 20 categories was scored 2 out of 5, with no text. Now if that were an honest evaluation, there would have been a mix, with some categories higher and lower than others. The only explanation I can come up with is that about a year prior to that I had mishandled a case leading to a delay in signout by one day, and it really pissed this guy off. Attendings, just like residents, can be petty and use evaluations to settle scores. It happens.

I bet he felt soooo much better after giving you such a scathing eval, huh? 🙄

 

[green mantis]

I'm kind of surprised no one has mentioned this. Did you happen to go over your evaluations w/ your PD? At my residency, we had a semi-annual review w/ our PD. During these reviews, he'd go over any negative evaluations along w/ any of your complaints about the program.

There were some passive aggressive attendings at my program. They wouldn't say anything bad to you directly, but they'd complain about you to the PD or on anonymous evaluations.


----- Antony

 

[KCShaw]

Or, sometimes, certain individuals are just hard to really please. They know everyone is used to getting high marks and sometimes the only thing they respond to is a not-so-high mark which -might- make them actually pause and think about what they are or are not doing. Or it might just make them complain on the internet that someone is out to get them. Medicine is loaded with bright lazy people who are used to doing what they have to but not always what makes them all around the best in a given field, as well as some egos, passive-aggressive folk, and so forth.

Personally, when I offer scorecard evaluations I think a decent rotator who does what is asked of them and learns a little along the way but does zero beyond that is average, and would get about a 3 out of 5 on average, with a corresponding comment. That doesn't mean I have a goal of making them go whining to mommy, nor that I don't think they are decent people/students/residents/etc. I'm merely pointing out they did nothing above average to garner above average marks. I also don't make it a secret that that's how I prefer to work.

And yeah.. you should have some evaluation time with your PD, who will generally have a much clearer idea of the departmental politics &/or individual styles and can point out that X attending is always a low marker, or can find out from Y why they seem to always mark you differently than everyone else seems to, and thus help put it into perspective.

It's also worth remembering that the Real World works a bit like this too -- you won't be able to please everyone, whether that's your fault or not. You still have to figure out a way to deal with &/or ignore it and get on with work and life.

 

[lipomas]

The point of evaluations is to evaluate you, both good and bad. Take it for what it's worth. If you get a bad evaluation look at what it says. If it says you're lazy or sloppy or whatever, look at your performance as objectively as you can and see if you can improve. You are more likely to be successful if you do this with negative evaluations rather than treating them as witch hunts or vendettas. If you know an evaluation is off base then for god's sakes TALK TO SOMEONE ABOUT IT. If it says you always show up late and emit a foul odor and you are always early and well groomed then maybe they confused you with someone else! Or quite possibly maybe they have a point and you are delusional. There are many possible answers but "they just don't like me" is a pathetic copout which is the frequent complaint of the poor performer.

I tend to agree with whoever posted it above that true vendettas are distinctly unusual, and probably account for less than 5% of purported vendettas. While there are *******s and dickheads in academic medicine, most people are professional and are not going to sabotage the career of some resident just because they "don't like them."

Just suck it up and deal with it! I got bad evaluations in my career. Most were in med school and they correctly dinged me for not showing a great deal of enthusiasm. Some were a little harsh but they certainly weren't vendettas.

 

[malchik]

The point of evaluations is to evaluate you, both good and bad. Take it for what it's worth. If you get a bad evaluation look at what it says. If it says you're lazy or sloppy or whatever, look at your performance as objectively as you can and see if you can improve. You are more likely to be successful if you do this with negative evaluations rather than treating them as witch hunts or vendettas. If you know an evaluation is off base then for god's sakes TALK TO SOMEONE ABOUT IT. If it says you always show up late and emit a foul odor and you are always early and well groomed then maybe they confused you with someone else! Or quite possibly maybe they have a point and you are delusional. There are many possible answers but "they just don't like me" is a pathetic copout which is the frequent complaint of the poor performer.

I tend to agree with whoever posted it above that true vendettas are distinctly unusual, and probably account for less than 5% of purported vendettas. While there are *******s and dickheads in academic medicine, most people are professional and are not going to sabotage the career of some resident just because they "don't like them."

Just suck it up and deal with it! I got bad evaluations in my career. Most were in med school and they correctly dinged me for not showing a great deal of enthusiasm. Some were a little harsh but they certainly weren't vendettas.

Agree with the TALK ABOUT IT idea. In fact that is all an evaluation should be, a conversation, and if you want to document what was said then fine. I think you underestimate the percentage of d***bags in academic medicine. If I get an outlying evaluation with straight 2/5's and no text against a baseline of 4's and 5's with comments here and there justifying, sorry, it is a BS evaluation and I am ignoring it, and it wouldn't have happened if evaluations were done in person.

 

[gbwillner]

Just suck it up and deal with it! I got bad evaluations in my career. Most were in med school and they correctly dinged me for not showing a great deal of enthusiasm. Some were a little harsh but they certainly weren't vendettas.

The worst eval I can recall was "does not seem to be interested in anatomic pathology." Actually it was in a complement sandwich.
WTF was I supposed to take away from that? Of course I just ignored it.

 

[lipomas]

The worst eval I can recall was "does not seem to be interested in anatomic pathology." Actually it was in a complement sandwich.
WTF was I supposed to take away from that? Of course I just ignored it.

I never like evaluations that attempt to gauge someone's mood. How do they know you're not interested? People show enthusiasm in different ways. When it is exuberant it is often phony. I don't often show enthusiasm and have been stuck with that comment on some evaluations before from evaluators who weren't really paying attention to the fact that I generally put in the longest hours of anyone.