Every year since 2001 each series of lectures at the Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine has been evaluated using 10 questions with classification into five grades. In this study, the evaluation scores for 2001 and 2002 were compared and analyzed statistically. The average score for all subjects increased by 0.15 point in 2002. The average scores for liberal arts and clinical medicine increased 0.18 and 0.27 point, respectively, whereas the score for basic medicine increased 0.03 point, suggesting improvements with the efforts of each lecturer. The standard deviations of the scores for 8 questions (2 questions on examinations were omitted) were smaller for clinical medicine than for liberal arts and basic medicine. Continuous formative evaluation of each series of lectures and analysis of the results are needed to improve teaching skills.

Objective: To inquire about how evaluation of physician supervisors is performed, and whether or not incentives to guide comprehensive community-based clinical clerkship for them are provided, in hospitals outside Sapporo Medical University.

Methods: We conducted field surveys using questionnaires distributed to physician supervisors and hospital directors, focusing on the evaluation of physician supervisors and whether they are provided with incentives. From the survey, we examined the attitude toward educational awareness of the physician supervisors.

Results: The number of hospitals where evaluations for physician supervisors were performed and incentives were provided was limited. In addition, 54.2% of the physician supervisors responded that incentives were unnecessary. Many of them considered that incentives for a hospital are more preferable than for individual supervisors.

Conclusion: These results suggest that with respect to community-based clinical clerkship outside the university, an appropriate method for providing incentives, including whether or not they are necessary, should be considered.

Introduction: Compared with faculties in clinical and medical research departments, those in medical departments are not appropriately evaluated in terms of their contributions to or achievements in medical education. Therefore, the aims of this study were to investigate the contributions of medical department faculties to medical education, and to examine differences in contributions according to duty positions and specialties.

Methods: Five-grade self-assessments in relation to 20 items on a rating form for performance in medical education, which was developed by the Japan Society for Medical Education's Committee for Performance Evaluation, were carried out by medical department faculties in Japanese universities. The data were then totalized and analyzed.

Results and Discussion: Although faculties belonging to departments other than medical education units did not actively participate in examinations or the education system, they still made contributions to lectures and practice. In addition, faculties with positions with more duties tended to show greater participation in the education system.

Conclusion: Based on these findings, we recommend the use of a rating form as a standard scale to evaluate performance in medical education.