• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

New Med School Screening Recommendations to Assess Ethics, Professionalism

by Thomas R. Collins • September 6, 2012

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Starting in 2015, undergraduates wanting to go to medical school will be taking a revamped version of the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT), with new sections focusing on social and behavioral sciences (see “Major Changes on the Horizon for the MCAT” in the August issue of ENT Today).

You Might Also Like

  • Major Changes on the Horizon for the MCAT
  • Conflicting Curriculums: Ethics education for residents inconsistent across programs
  • Frustrating and Terrifying: What It’s Like to Be in Medical School During the COVID-19 Pandemic
  • Oral Cancer Screening: A Necessary Part of Any Exam
Explore This Issue
September 2012

But that’s not the only planned change to the med school admissions process. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) is preparing a whole new slate of recommendations for improving the way med schools screen students. The changes will be designed to look at more than just classroom and test performance. They’re an effort to get at what kind of people the applicants are—and whether they have the qualities that will make them good, caring doctors.

The Multiple Mini-Interview

The new recommendations are a turn toward what the AAMC is calling “holistic admissions.” The goal is to assess each student’s “pre-professional attributes,” including communication skills, ability to work as part of a team, ethics sensibilities and other traits.

“Admissions requires a toolbox,” said Darrel Kirch, MD, president and CEO of AAMC. “Historically, we’ve very heavily relied on the MCAT because it was the standardized, accepted tool. We’re trying to improve the MCAT as a tool, but we’re also trying to improve other tools … so that the toolbox is a better toolbox.”

The changes will involve a new and, hopefully, improved application process. For example, one of the main ideas is to ask students to describe situations or experiences they’ve had that show they have the desired qualities. The AAMC, which is still fine-tuning the process, is also working with med school admissions offices to improve letters of recommendation so that they provide more relevant information.

Still another, and perhaps more significant, change will involve recommended improvements to the interviewing process, including adding more tailored questions and observations of role-playing scenarios and utilizing many interviewers rather than just one or two. “We’re seeing more and more innovation around interviewing to help it become more robust,” Dr. Kirch said.

One model for the interview process changes is the multiple mini-interview (MMI), in which med school applicants move from station to station undergoing one “mini-interview” after another. Each interview is designed to assess a particular trait and usually lasts about eight minutes, with a couple of minutes between stations. During these breaks, the applicant usually has a chance to review the next station’s question.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Single Page

Filed Under: Career Development, Departments, Everyday Ethics, Medical Education Tagged With: admission, applicant, career development, Ethics, MCAT, medical education, medical school, patient satisfaction, screeningIssue: September 2012

You Might Also Like:

  • Major Changes on the Horizon for the MCAT
  • Conflicting Curriculums: Ethics education for residents inconsistent across programs
  • Frustrating and Terrifying: What It’s Like to Be in Medical School During the COVID-19 Pandemic
  • Oral Cancer Screening: A Necessary Part of Any Exam

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939