Wow. So today our class got chewed out by Dr. Gatti our biochem professor over disrespectful course evals of the professors for the previous unit. Everyone was mad about Dr. Lightbody's questions and how he slightly misled us in how in depth the pathways we had to know. (Especially fatty acid metabolism). He reiterated that rate limiting regulation was far more important than anything else and not to worry about the rest. I didn't have to fill out evals for the unit but apparently there were nasty comments about him. Some said that they wanted essentially the professors to sit down with them and tell them what they had to know, that the professors were wasting their time with things they didn't have to know for their future career.
Personally, I did terrible on this test and it was my worst by far of all of the subjects to this point second only to unit IV anatomy. However, I do think we were slightly misled for some reason or another. I do not blame the professors as it is largely my fault for not spending enough time studying. Therefore, I think a lot of our class is up for a wake-up call when we get in the hospitals and get a lesson in authority and respect.
Here is the end of what he said. "If there are lecturers that tell you something that is outside what you find in the normal books, then maybe it is not going to be strictly relevant that you have decided to become a family practitioner or a dermatologist or something else. You should just be appreciative of that rather than frankly cowardly being under the veil of the anonymity of these ridiculous comments that are written at the end. The evaluations of the teachers. You should be thankful rather than really expressing really nasty and inappropriate comments about teachers."
I thought that was quite eloquent for someone having English as their second language. By the way, it was more or less 8 minutes of this and sounds quite intense in the disappointment radar at 2X speed in his thick Italian accent.
Well now. They've finally moved passed the denial stage into the anger stage. A couple years ago, I overheard Dr. Montgomery talking with several other immuno/micro teachers and believing that we were getting the scale confused on the evaluations. So the teachers getting the bad evals weren't getting bad evals at all; we were trying to give them good ones but couldn't read the scale right. No joke; that's what he thought. So, at least they are moving forward.
Biochem has the deserved reputation of being one of the worst-taught classes at Wayne. It is filled with several very poor teachers, some of whom really need to go. I've heard that the second years may have been spared the horrors of Dr. Akins' lectures when he was asked to leave.
What some of the professors who receive consistently poor reviews may not realize is that some of their colleagues receive glowing reviews year after year. Those are the ones that take a genuine interest in your education, and so are the most respected by the students. If you compiled a list each year of the "best and worst" professors across the classes, there would be some very striking similarities.
What some of the profs have realized now is that WSU has backed itself into a corner by having required evaluations of every teacher. If you would rather just forget about awful experiences, then you probably would not fill out those evaluations negatively. However, since you are forced to show your hand, you may as well be brutally honest. Sadly, the administration likes to turn a blind eye to the problems within the school, and these evaluations are forcing them to deal with these issues, especially if certain professors get poor reviews every year. It may have even had something to do with relieving you of the Akins nightmare lectues.
As for the "you know nothing" comments, of course you could not possibly know as much about a certain field as someone who has dedicated their lives to a very small field of science. It would be an insult to their career knowledge base if you could pick it up that fast. They are missing the point that this is not the reason why you are in those classes. If you wanted to be a PhD, you would have gone to grad school, not med school. Medicine is far more broad than any one particular field of study, and what the profs need to realize is that they need to tailor their lectures to teach you what you need to know for your future endeavors. You will also come to realize that much of what you learned in year 1 is not even on step 1, and what is on there is only a very small portion of the questions. So, yeah, year one is not all that relevant but it provides a knowledge base for you to build on in the future.
As for the respect issue, remember that they are forcing you to show your feelings in the evals. You are also going to do the same thing for your attendings and residents during third and fourth year. Yes, you are going to have to deal with plenty of ego and mostly there is nothing you can do about it except in those evals. I have heard your feedback in those evals at least makes a difference because the clerkship directors read those and either pull students from the worst of the attendings services or ask that they change their approach. Granted that this does not happen all the time, but I have heard on the interview trail that the program directors really do listen to how you are treated as a resident and how much you are getting out of a rotation and make adjustments accordingly.
So, yes, it is in your best interest to be honest and be bold about it. Don't let them use their authority to make you think any different. You really are going to need it, especially when it comes to patient advocacy.
Time for me to get off my soapbox.