IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0279911.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

One test to rule them all: A qualitative study of formal, informal, and hidden curricula as drivers of USMLE “exam mania”

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph R Geraghty
  • Sarah M Russel
  • Hilary Renaldy
  • Trevonne M Thompson
  • Laura E Hirshfield

Abstract

High-stakes examinations are an integral part of medical education. To practice in the United States (U.S.), students must pass the U.S. Medical Licensing Examinations (USMLE). With the transition of USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail scoring on January 26, 2022, a worldwide debate regarding how residency program directors will view the Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) exam emerged. Here, the authors explore the role of formal, informal, and hidden curricula related to USMLE, with broader implications for high-stakes examinations. Six focus groups of fourth-year students who recently took Step 2 CK and a supplemental curricular content analysis were conducted to explore students’ decision-making and emotions regarding the exam, including how the formal, informal, and hidden curricula influence their perspectives. Participants highlighted how informal and hidden curricula drive the belief that high-stakes examinations are the single most important factor in medical school. Prior experience with Step 1 drives behaviors and attitudes when preparing for Step 2 CK. Pressures from these examinations have unintended consequences on burnout, professional identity, specialty choice, and interpersonal interactions. Both interpersonal interactions within medical education as well as subconscious, unintended messaging can influence medical student approaches to and perspectives about high-stakes examinations. Within the context of U.S. medical training, with the transition to a new era of a pass/fail Step 1 examination, careful consideration to prevent shifting the current “Step 1 mania” to a “Step 2 CK mania” is warranted. More broadly, medical educators must examine the unintended yet potentially damaging pressures institutions generate in their medical trainees in relation to high-stakes examinations.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph R Geraghty & Sarah M Russel & Hilary Renaldy & Trevonne M Thompson & Laura E Hirshfield, 2023. "One test to rule them all: A qualitative study of formal, informal, and hidden curricula as drivers of USMLE “exam mania”," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(2), pages 1-13, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279911
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279911
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279911
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0279911&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0279911?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0279911. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.