Virginia Tech® home

Summary of LEAC concerns and actions - 4/1/2022 - 6/30/2022

Since the 2020-21 academic year, the LEAC committee has used a process for reviewing and addressing reports received for review by the LEAC committee. 

Beginning with this current academic year, the committee categorizes learning environment concerns into five categories:

  • A: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed, founded, and egregious.
  • B: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed, founded, and not egregious. 
  • C: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were not found.
  • D: Insufficient information to follow up on the incident.
  • E: Unprofessional Behaviors that are not a learning environment violation were reported. 

For the April 1 through June 30, 2022 period, the LEAC committee reviewed and acted on seven concerns that were received through BEACON and ONE45.  

The summary of concerns includes 2 Category A concerns, 3 Category B concerns, 1 Category C concern, 0 Category D concerns, and 1 Category E concern. The learning environments where the concerns occurred included: Neurology Clerkship (3), Pediatric Clerkship (1), Surgery Clerkship (1), HSSIP (1), 4th Year Acute Care (1).

  1. One concern was about an instructor whom the students described as presenting information that did not represent the material that was scheduled to be taught, and the instructor deviated from AHA standards. The students reported that the instructor frequently interrupted the female participants. This concern was deemed Category A: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed and found to be egregious. Carilion Human Resources reviewed the concern, and the LEAC member reported that HR had addressed the issue.
  2. One concern reported that a faculty member said he did not encourage his daughter to pursue medicine because they were women. The faculty member also asked an inappropriate question of the student. These concerns were deemed Category A: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed and found to be egregious. The clerkship director addressed this issue with the faculty member, who did not intend the conversation to be inappropriate and would modify their interaction with students in the future. Dr.  Criss reported back to the LEAC.
  3. One concern reported a faculty member criticizing a resident with students present and was deemed Category B: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed and found not egregious. Dr. Criss spoke to the clerkship director, who discussed the concern with the faculty member. The faculty member recognized the role stress plays in day-to-day interactions. The clerkships director recommended focusing on constructive feedback and the potential to engage with TEACH offerings on feedback. Dr. Criss reported the outcome of the intervention to the LEAC.
  4. One concern detailed faculty interaction described as unfair treatment and behaviors towards females, which resulted in limited ability to participate in an activity and was deemed Category B: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed and found not egregious. The clerkship director discussed this with the faculty member, who had not intended any exclusion of females. The faculty member will proactively work to avoid any bias or perception of bias toward the students and apologizes for the suboptimal experience of this student. The faculty member also made organizational suggestions for future sessions, including a plan to rotate group leaders so all students equally have that experience. Dr. Harrington reported the outcome of the intervention to the LEAC.
  5. One concern reported that the workload assigned to each student was not evenly distributed, and the resident exhibited unprofessional behavior when the resident discussed this concern with other students. Also, the faculty member made culturally insensitive remarks to the student and the student was concerned about the attending evaluating the student’s performance in the clerkship. The concern was deemed Category B: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were reviewed and found not egregious. Dr. Criss spoke to the clerkship director and faculty member, who did not feel that the interaction had been inappropriate and that the behavior with the student was appropriate. Dr. Criss reported back to the LEAC.
  6. One concern reported that a faculty member’s interaction with patients was inappropriate. The attending belittled a patient to the student and resident when the faculty member did not feel the patient was not emotionally coping with their diagnosis. This concern was deemed Category C: Mistreatment or Unprofessional Behaviors were not found. Dr. Criss met with the faculty member, who acknowledged that it was important to maintain positive interactions with patients with severe illnesses. Dr. Criss reported back to the LEAC.
  7.  One concern described a faculty member’s interaction with patients that failed to show empathy for the patient. This concern was deemed Category E: Unprofessional Behaviors that are not a learning environment violation were reported. The program director met with the faculty member, who stated that their comments can be off-putting and that the faculty member has been working on this issue. The faculty members reported that no intentional biases were associated with this case. Dr. Criss reported back to the LEAC.