ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Resident evaluation of faculty teaching is an important metric in general surgery training, however considerable variability in faculty teaching evaluation (FE) instruments exists. STUDY DESIGN: Twenty-two general surgery programs provided their FE and program demographics. Three clinical education experts performed blinded assessment of FEs, assessing adherence 2018 ACGME common program standards and if the FE was meaningful. RESULTS: Number of questions per FE ranged from 1 to 29. The expert assessments demonstrated that no evaluation addressed all 5 ACGME standards. There were significant differences in the FEs effectiveness of assessing the 5 ACGME standards (p < 0.001), with teaching abilities and professionalism rated the highest and scholarly activities the lowest. CONCLUSION: There was wide variation between programs regarding FEs development and adhered to ACGME standards. Faculty evaluation tools consistently built around all suggested ACGME standards may allow for a more accurate and useful assessment of faculty teaching abilities to target professional development.
