UMSC Meeting AgendaSaturday March 9, 2019

HOST SITE: Rockford Breakfast @ 9:30 AM; Meeting begins @ 10 AM

University Medical Student CouncilGeneral Board Meeting Agenda, Meeting 4/4 AY 2018-2019

March 9th, 201910:00 AM, Rockford Campus1601 Parkview Ave, Rockford IL········

Meeting link:https://uichicago.webex.com/webappng/sites/uichicago/meeting/info/104078239738142914?

MTID=mcf914ae8bc865dff1be8f5e2cccd54acMeeting number:

807 908 093Password:eUP98wcN

µ1. Roll Call (Attendees, please put your names here) (# of votes)):

In person: Jonathan Jou (1, tie break), AJ Heaps (1), Matt Schaeffer (1), Alex Matelski (1), Ayesha Hasan, Charlie Pierce, Dean Kashima, Stephanie Grach (1), Kyler Shin (1), Matthew Durst (2), Ajit Augustin (1), Cat Jimenez (1), Josh Baalman (2), Sresht Iyer (1), Kate Weisshappel (1-Stephanie M4 proxy), Allison Beggin (1)

Online: Joan Marc (1-Olivia proxy), Meg Van Der Bosch (1), Craig Kym (1), Petra Majdak (1), Ben Kay (1), Hanna Erickson (1), Nick Curran (1), Anne Williams Darrow (1), Robert George (1-Ryan Dahlberg OSR)

Total votes: 23

2. Opening and Introductions:

Dean Raymond Curry- Curriculum Update Phase 2 & 3Slides Provided

1. Phases 2 & 3 remain more closely related to the old clerkship model (in contrast to Phase 1, which was entirely new)

1. Graduation requirements, course requirements, etc. will match across campuses1. This has been something essential to accreditation which has given us

trouble from the LCME in the past2. “One Curriculum, One College, 3 Campuses”

2. Phase 2 beginning before the end of M2 allows more flexibility for electives (also expands credits to 40 from 38 available previously)

3. Neurology core clerkship requirement pending1. Has not been possible to provide this in the coming year -- faculty

resources in Rockford are the roadblock 2. Will not require students to travel to a different campus for a clerkship -

would have been the only means by which to make Neurology mandatory

2. Currently, requirements and clerkships are wildly discordant 3. CSCB had created a document in 2017 based on Phase 2 and 3 student ideas and

preferences for clerkship requirements4. Key components of new Phase 2 and 3:

1. 40 weeks/40 credits (unchanged from 18-19 and 19-202. Longitudinal Course - Clinical Correlations & Competencies

1. Transition 2 credits (2 weeks)2. Phase 2 longitudinal 0 credits (events in 3 of 4 16-week quarters)3. Phase 3 longitudinal 2 credits (2-3 weeks)

3. Sub-I being added in Rockford, definition of Sub-I: develops longitudinal patient management in intern-like role

1. Hospital based/IP, take place on a service in which interns have primary patient responsibility (so that students can subsume that role)

2. If unavailable at a particular campus, possibility to do a Sub-I elsewhere4. 12 weeks of selectives based on career trajectory (medicine vs surgical)5. 24 elective weeks

5. Placement of Phase 3 longitudinal component also meant to allow for “time off” during which one can study or plan interviews

6. “Selectives”1. Medical pathway

1. EM, ambulatory, TBD2. Ambulatory focus is on chronic disease

1. Focused on existing Peoria programming2. Surgical pathway

1. Rad/surg/anatomy, anesthesia, critical care2. Thoughts from the surgical clerkship directors: in a surgical specialty,

they spend a considerable amount of time in the ED but that it is less important than the others chosen

1. Another concern: EM residency may not have the staff and bandwidth t accommodate that many sub-Is

3. Some individual deliberations:1. For specialties like radiology - maybe you want to choose the surgical

pathway, maybe not. Individual decision.7. CJ: Why the selective tracks as opposed to students self-identifying the

electives/experiences relevant to their careers?8. CJ: using rural EDs as a way to make up for resource limited local EDs

1. Hospitals within our networks have 1M ED visits, each campus has a trauma level 1 ED..working to expand resources?

9. AH: the chronic care requirement was surprising to me as a component that emerged from Peoria - because as a Peoria student I have been unaware of this

1. RC: yes, the information I have says that Peoria has had a “selective like” process in place

2. JJ: this would be our CUPS requirements -- chronic, urgent, pop health, and science requirements that M4 electives must meet

10. KW: at Rockford most of us do EM at Swedish, and this is a very full ED - this was crucial to my success on the surgery shelf as I saw trauma surgeries that I did not see anywhere else

1. Was also able to have a rural ED experience in Rockford2. Basically - EM experience should be available to students regardless of

trajectory3. RC: that is good feedback and I’ll take that back to the committee

1. The other interesting piece: ED is a perfect place for a 4th year student to start feeling comfortable with assessment/diagnostic skills

2. One of the few places where the “undifferentiated patient” exists3. A safe environment to grow

4. RC: if we could mix 2 weeks of ED along with 2 weeks of ICU -- may be a better way forward

11. SG: importance of emergency medicine earlier in medical education (preferably Phase 2), more students in current RM4 class are applying EM than many other specialties

1. Another important point: most students will self-select into electives that they are advised are beneficial for match

1. May not need to mandate their participation in something like anesthesia but rather have good advising

12. JJ: importance of away rotations and whether those will count toward selectives1. Allowing students to gain credit at home for participating in aways2. Something I would recommend we submit to the committee

1. RC: what we are headed for is that core Phase 2 clerkships and Sub-I need to be done at the home institution

1. Because of specific learning objectives and our opportunity to closely observe our future graduate’s management skills

13. Vacation and interview time for 13-14 weeks + between term breaks14. A percolating theme: Should we continue the nomenclature of O, A, P, F in clerkships?

1. The students on the task force have noted that we’re a considerable outlier in this regard, if PDs have to figure out what an O means, it does not help us

2. Enthusiasm for moving to H, HP, P, F. We cannot make this change effective in Spring 2019; but will make this change if all parties agree that it makes sense

15. A second question: should we continue to have every clerkship and even research rotations be OAPF or whether they should be P/F?

1. Are 3rd year students disadvantaged by presence of 4th year overlap?2. A vote passed: Exploratory electives are P/F starting in Phase 2

1. Also maybe we should call it Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory to avoid confusion w/ 2 Ps…

16. AH: a lot of heads nodding in the room about whether having P/F on the same form as H/HP/P/F would cause some confusion

1. Having that different nomenclature would be very helpful1. RC: yes that’s the way it’s going to work2. Very explicit notation on the transcript regarding the two types of

clerkships17. SG: could you clarify what career electives are?

1. RC: this is a concept in progress1. For specialties in which students can match into a full specialty -- the

elective like “orthopedics” can serve as an effective Sub-I for letter writing and performance qualifier

2. Thus, those are the career electives so that they can be commended for high performance

3. Are meanings diluted in clerkships where nearly everyone gets an O?2. JJ: do residency programs and PDs even see M4 electives or transcripts?3. SG: MSPE is for comments as opposed to Os

1. KK: comments are what makes the MSPE unique to the student applicant

4. SG: is the P/F actually putting people at a disadvantage if the comments are key? Are there specialties in which they would not care about the comments if they know it’s P/F and would prefer full grade?

18. MD: looking at these different grading options: are we getting feedback from our own PDs and reviewers on how they feel about these options - what makes most sense to you as the end-user?

1. RC: absolutely, they are involved1. Dr. Osta, Dr. Cooper as examples

2. RC: how much of the Phase 3 M4 clerkship ends up on the MSPE?1. You will actually finish core clerkships as early as April 1 - so that leaves

5-6 months between that and when the MSPE is submitted2. So there could certainly be information included to PDs on electives

outside the core19. KW: will only core clerkships be graded on tiered system vs non-tier

1. For example: a local hospital in Rockford had some problems with sexist/biased grading -- some students needed a “shot at redemption” in terms of proving they have performed well in a specialty that might be subject locally to such pitfalls

2. RC: we could leave it to a particular department to decide whether they want tiered grading with expectations to justify why they assign tiers for particular performances

1. Some departments simply want an “experience” for students as opposed to true performance evaluation

20. JB: RMSC had a recent discussion about grading system1. Are the two week electives insufficient to evaluate students or are the students

feeling that it is inadequate to make an impression?1. RC: both is my understanding

2. JB: I went to a recent meeting and heard from various providers that they think half a day or even 2 hours is sufficient to evaluate a student

1. SG: 2 weeks in Rockford is usually with one attending that you know well, 4 weeks in other systems may still have different attending each week

3. We might want to think about an opt-in process - students can maybe opt in if they want an elective to be part of their careers

4. CJ: the short answer is maybe “it depends” because the rotations have such different attending and resident schedules

1. AH: also an option where a student can opt in to S/U instead of the tiered system -- done at some undergraduate campuses

2. RC: that thought has come up, but we haven’t arrived with a defense of that position yet

5. SI: we already are on P/F for our Phase 1 grades...do we decrease the ability of PDs to evaluate us if we have P/F for our grades as well?

1. RC: talking to our PDs has shown that they pay very little attention to Os and As in electives (cardiology etc) because they know that O or H is the default grade for many of those clerkships across the country

1. Random selection of elective grades showed that something like 85 or 90% are O or H

2. RC: but also the visual impact of seeing a transcript with many Os where they may mean very little - does that dilute the effect of Os in core clerkships where they might matter

3. Updates: Campus President Updates:

1. Chicago (Olivia/Joan)1. Advising discussion at 2/25 CMSC meeting (in lieu of cancelled Dialogue with the

Deans) w/ Dean Urosev1. Key student concerns: lack of office space for 1:1 meetings, some

advisors share office space and privacy may be compromised2. Modes of advising: wellness vs academic, specialty-specific advising?3. Students would like more information about how they compare to past

students who matched into their specialty: scores, grades, applications, matching, etc.

1. Difficulty with giving averages in specialties with a small n2. CMSC Awards Ceremony 4/17

1. Survey to be distributed soon3. Attendance policy discussion on agenda for next CCIA meeting

1. Inconsistency in application of this policy 2. Clarification: attendance at any mandatory events3. AH: could you expand so that CCIA has more context?

1. JM: Personal anecdotes brought up about difficult situations where it was difficult to bring documentation (e.g. water main break)

2. AH: we’ll have more details during CCIA update4. JJ: any discussion about changes in policy?

1. AH: Chicago students will be giving proposed changes to the policy to CCIA, CCIA will vote on these -- will be followed up

2. Peoria (Matt/Austin)1. SGA Constitution revisions

2. Interviews at all home campuses1. Definitely a shared experience across all campuses2. Competitive applicants from our schools not being granted interviews at

our home institutions; concerned about transparency of this1. Is an equally competitive candidate from Peoria/Rockford being

equal consideration for a Chicago slot and vice versa2. Want to make sure we are promoting each of our home

campuses3. JJ: programs pick candidates in a seemingly “random way” sometimes;

there may be red flags or components of an application that don’t necessarily reflect competitiveness on the face

4. MD: comments from colleagues may mean more at home institutions because of the connection w/ letter and comment writers

5. JJ: would recommend for students to write letters to PDs at sister campuses where you feel like you are competitive and would like to be

6. CJ: different campuses have distinct residencies; students should treat this like an away rotation

1. Maybe we facilitate this by making it easier to do away rotations at our sister campuses

2. RC: when discussing with PDs, could not remember any cases where a UICOM program excluded a student from another campus (except for one special case that had other complications)

1. The question for this next cycle - do we have examples or anecdotes or data that we can take to program directors to see where the glitch happened

3. JJ: if it were possible, for students who are “left out” of home institution interview process, would it be possible to offer feedback to that student originating from the PD that would help that student understand?

3. KK: one of the national trends to consider is that we have “over application” going on -- see the data from ERAS and some people are applying to 50 programs

1. Getting in to a challenge where strategies to cope are maladaptive1. Changing thresholds, sorting by exam scores, etc. 2. I have been meeting with all the department heads and making

sure that they all agree that we are 4 campuses 1 college 4. AM: data would be easy to procure to give us an objective picture

1. Do we have a problem here? What is the interview yield across campuses? Sort by campus

2. Could make the request from program coordinators 5. AH: one of the concerns and anecdotes I have heard is the “courtesy interview”

and that away rotation slots are preferentially being withheld 1. KK: the selection for affiliate programs is not part of UIC; different

program directors, not part of the discussion 2. AH: so UIC has no power over PDs at these institutions?

1. No

3. AWD: A list of programs that offer the ‘courtesy interviews’ to students that do an away rotation in each specialty would be very helpful. Consider who could compile this? For all students? Or target the more ‘at-risk’ students?

6. KK: have a Q&A for M4 ?1. MAD: Potentially a cross campus dialogue with deans / program

directors? 7. Concern about Dean Rusch’s retirement #bringbackDeanAlbers

1. MSPEs for rising M4s2. Concern about interim dean and successor3. MS: request more facetime with Dean Kashima or Dean Curry to discuss

the specifics of these concerns1. JJ: MSPE is highly protocolized; the only part in your control is

the noteworthy characteristics portion 2. KK: concerns about comments, grades all need to go through a

formalized grievance process 4. AH: part of a larger concern that Peoria students are getting inadequate

advising and that we are shunting too many students toward Dr. Hanks on the specific career planning/MSPE meeting

1. MS: if there are advising resources that can do cross-campus support to a campus in need (Peoria) this summer - we would appreciate this

2. CJ: Current M4s at Peoria are making career advising maps available to underclassmen

1. JJ: Part of a larger brainchild of Dean Kashima (Chicago Journey Mapping with Stanford Design alum at UIC)

2. KK: More in my report later3. Rockford (Josh)

1. RMSC Meeting Summary (3/6)1. Tim Lacy spoke with students. Good discussion on topics of

mistreatment and unprofessionalism.2. Flipped meeting format - had more discussion regarding committee/rep

positions to provide greater student input into decisions. 1. Evaluation and curriculum -> looking ahead to phase 2 & 32. Process changes in feedback for clerkship students -> forward

feeding feedback (Triple F)1. The idea is for clerkship directors meet regarding a

student in a previous clerkship to help identify weaknesses to match them with providers that will help them build competencies

2. Students had concern about closed door meetings3. M1 concerns to SCBs

3. Good turnout by M1s! 1. May be due to some concerns with in the class, so could be

symptomatic of something larger2. Overlap Concerns

1. Pressed clerkship directors to send all information regarding changes to curriculum as soon as possible. Many rotations leaning more on outside

sites and students need to have adequate time to accommodate these changes. Dr. Fox in psychiatry did an excellent job in communicating all changes to students literally the next day they were decided.

1. Either in RMED away sites or Urbana for Class of 2020, but student of 2021 will be in Rockford

1. Students were unhappy, BUT Dr. Fox was particularly transparent and helpful

2. Students appreciated that approach even though they were not happy with the outcome

1. I brought up this phenomenon to clerkship directors -- that transparency and honesty solve a lot of problems even when people are unhappy -- and this has already produced change

2. Good tip for other campuses dealing with similar problems

3. Transition/Constitution Updates1. RMSC transitioning around Mid-Late May to new board. Constitution

will be updated to reflect student positions on campus to include better representation - (RMED, UHP).

1. RMED and UHP do not have permanent positions on student government; participation contingent upon happenstance (i.e. RMED/UHP student gets elected to a position)

4. New Hire!1. Amy - academic affairs, academic advisor

1. Brings 17 years of experience (non-medical)2. Students on the committee are quite happy

2. UHP conducting interviews1. Unfilled for greater part of 1 year2. 3 interviews recently, but students involved felt like they faced

obstacles with being involved3. Abrasive relationship with Dean of Diversity

5. Town Halls1. Student Affairs2. Medical Education

6. Grand Rounds1. Stephanie Calato is wonderful - lots of great opportunities for M3

student this year!1. Example: Pediatric Grand Rounds in Chicago were publicized to

Rockford students and received participation2. #onecollege

7. Student Diversity Mini-Update1. Post-STEP 1 will be picking up on this issue once again, meeting with

students and faculty across campuses to formulate an interconnected plan to address the concept of Diversity across campuses. Will update as appropriate.

8. JB: students feel somewhat uncomfortable bringing up diversity concerns to the current Dean because of past expressed opinions on what that person believes diversity “is and is not”

1. This has been the case for a long time2. MD: D & I is an important thing to make a cross-campus endeavor, we

should talk more online to unite efforts 3. JJ: thank you Josh for accomplishing so much and tackling such a difficult

challenge this year 4. Urbana (Ben)

1. Pat Grenda holding meetings with M2, M3, M4 classes to assess student satisfaction (or lack thereof) with education/resources in the wake of the shutdown and opening of the Carle Illinois medical school

1. Only M4 class meeting so far, we brought several issues to his attention; he will next speak to other classes to catalog concerns and hopefully identify solutions.

2. Likely M2 students will bring up lack of study space/library, since it’s approaching dedicated time.

2. Research Day yesterday, successful3. Formal was well attended, last one with a big group of students4. Apparel Sale

1. Potential last sale for this campus, hopefully lots of participation5. Really sorry I can’t talk either for some reason (Petra) - Josh, if Rockford people

need a place to stay for rotations they should reach out! 1. I’m sorry too! I tested it earlier to make sure it would work! (ben)2. Thanks Jon you’re awesome

4. Working Lunch (30 min)

Dr. Tim Lacy- Medical Student Learning EnvironmentOverview and Feedback on Current Initiatives

1. Currently visiting staff, faculty, students at all campuses1. Scheduling meetings to ensure that I am front of students only, answer

questions only without presence of student affairs staff or others to maximize authenticity

2. I am an ombudsman and advocates; sometimes I will respond to help provide language for the problems that arise

1. Sometimes problems that arise are new to you and you are trying to work through how to process it

2. Initiative to report and collect past complaints1. Importance of long-term, systemic issues within the learning

environment3. Affiliate institution visits also included and expanded under Dr. Lacy4. Working on an annual report that Rene McCarthy first published last year in

March and working on the 2018 one; it gives me a chance to step back and recognize systemic issues and make recs to COM leadership

1. Also useful to understand range of issues

5. Creating “DMSLE Notes” as a blog, available on the Learning Environment website

1. Currently one published piece about abuse of supervisory positions2. Trying to get a queue of things lined up that will be available there

3. Open to Questions:1. AH: Standardized reporting form to help streamline information flow to your

office?1. Yes, on the COM website; a button under “education” 2. https://medicine.uic.edu/education/educational-environment/

reporting/3. Report with your name OR anonymously

1. Goes to a confidential database that only DMSLE (Lacy) has access to

2. Can narrate your issues in that form 2. JJ: In the field for the person being accused of mistreatment, what if their name

is not known?1. TL: it is important that I can update a student on how things are going...2. Question clarified: the offender information is best, but maximum

circumstantial information we can narrow the story down and identify the players

3. JJ: this arises in the context of a story about a “Surgical Tech” award - a program that was tried but ultimately was less than successful because of anonymity from STs in the OR

3. TL: some students are concerned about being in very intimate settings and it will become instantly known who filed a report

4. CJ: should focus on helping describe appropriate use of the form in order to not discourage reporting but to help encourage interpersonal conflict resolution as well

1. TL: I encourage students to “when in doubt, report” 5. AM: can there be a delay in reporting to avoid possible retaliation or

repercussions on evaluation?1. TL: yes in some cases I might encourage delay - not in reporting but in

action -- this is very OK1. Would recommend you write it down right away, let it

marinate, can come back to it2. Can give a more accurate picture of details 3. I would be happy to wait on any action items because we want

to avoid jeopardizing relationships or grading1. Can give whatever time constraints you want in the

form or via email; I will abide6. MD: will this be refreshed for rising M3s during our orientation?

1. TL: Yes! Big time! We will have cases that we work through as a group at the orientations

7. JB: I have had considerable contact and discussion with Dr. Lacy; “I think we have a good guy here” - he has been very helpful and extremely approachable

8. JJ: would compare the concept of reporting to the “negative appendectomy”1. TL: yes, this is okay and sometimes you just need a space to work out

what happened to you and apply some language to it

5. Executive Board Report: (60 min)

1. President1. All-Campus Field Day Survey Results

1. 8/38 responses (may be due to STEP 1 dedicated period)1. Overall highly positive response2. Expectation that the event will continue next year3. Hitches in original planning understood and forgiven by

participants1. Various SNAFUs including a lack of shirt arrival, but

overall things turned out OK2. Discussion: Should UMSC continue the All-Campus Field Day?

1. SI: biggest issue was that it was the week before an M1 exam1. Difficult to get participation, also had no idea what to

expect or what it might be like2. So this would be something to tackle in the future

2. JJ: prioritize events early in the year and optimize timing to avoid exams

3. MD: do we know how many planning committee folks would be willing to return?

1. JJ: i was the only M4, so there should be bodies for the task

4. JJ: Should this be repeated in Chicago?5. AH: want to discuss the Leadership Retreat and the Field Day as

Fall/Spring events?1. JJ: absolutely, should look into the leadership retreat as

a future event2. MD: yes, can have both and not one or the other

2. Havana, Cuba Public Health Rotation: White Paper Report (DRAFT)1. To be finalized before the end of March2. Will be vetted by both IRGmed in Peoria and appropriate parties in

Chicago and Rockford3. Being collaboratively drafted by all 5 participants from UICOM who

attended

4. Goals: experience medicine outside the US in a safe and somewhat nearby location

3. UMSC Statement for UICOM Lapel Pins Dear Colleagues,

Recently, lapel pins emblazoned with the University Medical Student Council (UMSC) crest and the “University of Illinois College of Medicine” title were provided to the Student Affairs Offices at each of our campuses. We are excited to announce that these pins will soon be distributed to all students, to proudly wear on our own white coats. Traditionally, the patch adorning our left shoulders has allowed us to identify each other by campus. Now, we would like the pin, adorning our left lapels, to identify us as a united College of Medicine.

These pins will also be available to recent alumni of our university. In the long-term, it is our goal to see these pins on white coats in any hospital, be it in the United States and beyond.

As a reminder, the University Medical Student Council is comprised of elected representatives from each campus and our collective student body. It serves as the overarching body joining the Chicago Medical Student Council, Peoria Student Association, Rockford Medical Student Council, and the Urbana Medical Student Government. UMSC has representation in each College Committee through student members elected by each campus at the beginning of the academic year. We are committed to serving the interests and diversity of the UICOM student body as a whole, and will continue to aim to do our best as we serve the student community through the academic year.

Your Representatives,UMSC[CMSC/RMSC/SGA/UMSG - listed in type font, not signatures] PS a version of this email was sent to Urbana students, Dean Hall has pins and will distribute

2. Treasurer1. Budget for reference

3. Vice President1. Will be reaching out in the next 2 weeks to all CC reps to see if they’re planning

on staying on for next year. Will pass on this info to site presidents to know which positions need to be filled. UMSC general satisfaction survey will be sent out soon as well to help direct new exec board on ways they can improve for next academic year.

4. Secretary1. None.

5. Webmaster/historian: 1. Nada

6. OSR1. Updates: At the latest national conference, many topics included student

wellness. Ushasi and Robbie talked to a representative from Northwestern who stated that students are automatically scheduled to have one session with a counselor per semester. Students may opt out of this session. The theory is that most people undergo the default plan of action, and therefore this method could help students participate in and try campus resources around mental-wellbeing. Students often report a busy schedule as a barrier to attending counseling. This design should overcome that barrier and decrease any stigma students may feel with utilizing such resources, as everyone is to participate by default.

1. We are working on gauging interest and creating such a program. 2. Ushasi and Robbie are also presenting a poster in April at the regional

conference about curriculum transformation and standardization across multi-campus institutions. In addition, we will discuss student involvement in curriculum design.

3. Lastly, we will submit our Gold Humanism nomination that will be decided today.

1. In our Old Business section of the minutes

7. Advisor’s Report (Dean Kashima) 1. Match Day, Friday, March 15, 2019 at all campuses!!! 2. TexasSTAR, national residency program tool using data from students for

students; M4s please complete survey1. “It’s one of the most important decisions you make in your life and you

don’t have all the information” - New Dean Rosenblatt2. Programs don’t necessarily provide all of their information

1. Concerned about perceived “strength” of program based on STEP scores/other measures

3. But we are moving toward working collaboratively 1. Ways to solve the over-application problem

3. Orthopedic Surgery Open House for all students on Saturday, April 13, 2019

1. Trying to encourage more specialties to host these types of activities for all students

4. GQ (very satisfied and satisfied; office not individual)1. Neutral is effectively dissatisfied since just S and VS are counted2. If you have a negative experience with one person: think about it. Is it

the whole program?5. Convocations on Saturday, May 4, 2019 at Urbana, Peoria and Rockford, and

Commencement on Friday, May 10, 2019. Speaker, Darrell Kirch, MD, President and CEO for the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC)

6. New Executive Dean, Mark Rosenblatt, MD, PhD, MBA, effective March 16, 2019. Thanks to Joan Marc, medical student representative, on the search committee

7. LCME noncompliance1. Students: Issues that Matter at all campuses, follow-up discussions at

each campus1. Thank you to all students that participated, to M4s who

participated in student experience2. Representatives (esp M4 reps) please communicate to your

constituencies about the work that the college is doing based on student participation in these discussions

2. Institute for Healthcare Design and Delivery: M4 Student Experience Workshop (Thanks to 16 M4s who participated!!)

3. Survey and meetings with faculty and departments heads (ongoing)1. Obtaining challenges to involvement in activities related to

student engagement4. Meetings with student affairs deans5. Meetings with financial aid team6. Action plan due April 17. College Strategic Planning with ECG

1. Work Groups (chair plus 6 others)- Student Experience Work Group, Identity and Branding, Research, Faculty and Staff Experience, Chicago Medical Service Plan, Financial Sustainability

1. Dean Kashima will be chairing Student Experience. (Will also consider the graduate student experience.)

2. Will be meeting between March and May1. Must talk to constituents to get answers on

these questions 3. Do the three students serving as representatives on the

Strategic Planning committee need to follow up with UMSC? (Invite to first AY 2019-2020 meeting?)

2. Work Groups need to reach out to constituencies to obtain input

3. Short time frame (March through May) to answer questions posed to Work Group

8. Student feedback GQ and other more frequent check-in with students by college with UMSC, ISA by UMSC

8. Chancellor’s Task Force on Student Mental Health (with Cory Reiter, Chicago)

1. Summary of suggestions submitted to Chancellor Amiridis; 24 hour mental health crisis service approved- vendors being reviewed; other suggestions in proposal development phase

9. Open to Questions:1. JB: in the Texas Star, what is the concern regarding honesty of reporting

1. Non-vetted information, obviously these anomalies decrease with greater response rates

2. KK: yes, well right now we hope that students won’t misreport information...down the line there is work on a collaborative tool involving the AAMC, NBME, and NRMP on direct data reporting, but for now what we have is Texas Star

3. KK: huge effort to try to make sure individual students cannot be identified

2. MD: one way to combat that is to put your own information in there honestly, it will become diluted as response rates climb

1. I do trust my colleagues, so encourage your friends to report and report honestly

2. KK: Tool a collaboration among students across the country 3. MD: a lot more robust than SDN

3. JJ: Texas Star is predictive to an extent1. KK: last year was the first year with 69 schools...now to 114

10. SI: in regards to mental health counseling:1. UChicago has opt-out mental health counseling meetings. Can this be

done at Chicago campus?2. Figuring out whom to talk to to establish these meetings / set this

precedent at the UICOM campuses1. Peoria / Rockford have their own providers on campus2. At Chicago you’re part of the larger UIC psych/beh health

program1. KK: we should talk about how to make this happen

3. AH: anecdotally, this meeting was crucial for me and is important to have built in as a default for students -- early in the process is better

4. SI: it’s a big issue in Chicago because there are almost too many resources/ it feels impersonal

5. KW: figuring out how to connect students with area resources -- ex. OB/Gyn providers who specialize in trauma

1. KK: I’ll make a note of that to help make this information more accessible

11. AH: meeting about SOAP after match frightened some of the current M4s and left them surprised

1. Wondering if anything is done differently in Chicago/Rockford and can share information with the Peoria campus?

1. KK: ERAS has very good info available on their website to help2. CJ: I feel like we got adequate information

1. KK: the hard part about this is that what is generally left in SOAP is prelim surgery; this list of program slots changes year to year and is very difficult to predict

6. Committee Reports (60 min):

1. CCSP (College Committee on Student Promotions)1. Per Charles Pierce: Nothing to report.

2. CCIA (College Committee on Instruction and Appraisal) 1.

New changes:Clinical Structure: Grading System Tiers: Honors/High Pass/Pass/Fail2 week electives: Satisfactory/UnsatisfactoryStudent updates at CCIA:

-even if it’s campus specific students should be allowed to bring it up as long it is a student

Upcoming:Clinical Evals/Grading

C: Attendance policyP: Clinical Grading, new CCIA members, not necessarily standardized (flexibility in grading in connection to EPAs)R:

Other: -making sure we have enough voting members from students in the future-making sure there’s no retaliation for future students

2. PD survey gave good feedback regarding UICOM graduates3. Also another ongoing project: looking at data regarding STEP 1 studying

1. Looking at data for people who have been failing/near-failing the Block exams

4. Ongoing issue: student concerns and policy suggestions should be able to be brought up regardless of campus

5. KK: want to make sure those concerns are being routed through CCIA 6. AB: it would be good to know how to get information to CCIA to discuss how to

answer questions of unequal resource allocation1. JJ: verification can also take place through UMSC in order to quash

rumors 7. SI: and yes, we hear the opposite from the Chicago campus, where “i hear the

anatomy lectures are better in Rockford” 1. Would be great to connect to UMSC reps from chicago to help clarify2. Here is the link to our UMSC roster

8. JJ: something to consider adding in to the SGA constitutional review

1. MS: we are thinking about this, but we also want to recognize that we want to avoid excessive time commitment for participants

9. KK: curricular boards need to be better connected across campuses 1. AB: currently no CCIA rep that i am in contact with

1. AH: I’m not sure if Rockford’s CCIA rep usually comes to the meetings?

2. JB: i think they report from the meetings 10. JB: there is overlap between complaints on one campus and another, e.g.

attendance policies11. JJ: clarify what is going on at the meeting?

1. AH: what has happened: a student at Chicago brings up a concern...things are unable to move forward because they don’t know if it is a consensus between campuses (“have you checked with Peoria/Rockford?”)

1. JJ: what do we need to do to improve this problem?2. KK: the disconnect in part is because CCIA people think that there is

good communication between curricular boards at each campus 12. MD: would like to remind everyone that this is the reason we have reps from

each campus and would like them to attend meetings - when we ask “have you heard this on your campus?” and they can help contextualize

13. AH: want to make sure that students feel comfortable speaking up at these meetings

14. KW: I am on the promotions committee and it’s even trickier, deciding very sensitive and difficult issues

15. KK: ensure that reps on committees have this discussion going forward16. JB: MiniCEX being a graded mechanism?

1. AH: no other word on that2. KK: haven’t heard anything3. CJ: I’m not sure grading them would be an efficient use of time

3. CCA (College Committee on Admissions)2. Dr. Girotti is retiring3. A change in the retirement formula that is causing possibly a lot of retirement4. MD: are we using the CASPER exam for evaluations?

1. KK: they are still looking at the data, they want another year of pilot data before implementing

2. They are implementing a new software platform for admissions3. Will work with AMCAS application

1. Will be unveiled in next application cycle4. CCSAS (College Committee on Student Awards and Scholarships)

2. Hailey Sellek in Rockford is working on ways that students can be further recognized (e.g.-student highlights)

5. HPSC (Health Professions Student Council)2. ~$700 in Project Grant funding still available for final quarter

1. Applications for grants open until 3/28/192. To get some of that money, events must be applicable to multiple Allied

Health Sciences6. CTSF (Committee on Tuition and Student Fees)

2. AA: we had someone on class board for M1s in Chicago asking questions in regard to how money is allocated from tuition

1. Should we funnel that to a member of CTSF?2. NC: Laura reached out to me, the short of it is: we’re working on getting

that information, I’ll share it once we have it 1. If they have more specific questions, they can reach out ot me

personally (Nick Curran) 2. JJ: this has been a historical question as well

1. One of the goals of the CTSF was to identify this information, so hopefully we can have an answer soon

3. NC: all I can offer now is the calculations used to determine tuition, but will have more information soon

7. Old Business (5 minutes)

1. Gold Humanism in Medicine Award1. Presentation here:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SWGx21UYpcIOY1s3dYt7uEmC_wT0SBogTfVLmRD67sA/edit

2. Link to vote here:https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScFuKPBnn4l_70BDVFam0aRPh7NRs4mVqQErHYGfGQIrBUBzQ/viewform?usp=sf_link Dr. Connie Vitali is our nominee

Assigned to local campus Presidents to distribute the nomination quotes and a letter of congratulations to the respective nominees.

8. New Business (50 minutes)

1. Elections1. Elections Chair, Stephanie Grach, M4

1. UMSC Constitution with position descriptions2. Need motion to allow for vote digitally to accommodate people

connected through webex (suspend rule IV.b.6) - APPROVED3. New President: Matthew Durst4. New VP: Alex Matelski5. New Treasurer: Katie Weisshappel6. New Secretary: Kyler Shin7. New Historian/Webmaster: Hanna Erickson8. Ad Hoc 1-year position Director of Communications - APPROVED9. New Ad Hoc Director of Communications: AJ Heaps!

2. For voting members (submit one form/position): https://goo.gl/forms/26tysz0FWHfJu9as2

2. THANK YOU M4s for all your work and service- let’s recognize all in attendance. <32. Adjournment

1. Meeting adjourned 3/9/19, 3:27 PM1. I attest that these minutes are accurate and honest to the best of my

knowledge.1. Alexander T Matelski, Secretary