Faculty Evaluation – Team Journal Club

Item Feedback Score

Content* U S O
1. Appropriate information is selected 0 1.5 2
for presentation

2. Appropriate background information 0 1.5 2

is presented

3. Study objective and methods are 0 1.5 2

clearly and accurately summarized

4. Biostatistical methods are clearly and 0 1.5 2

accurately interpreted

5. Study results are clearly and 0 1.5 2

accurately interpreted

6. Three to five key study strengths are 0 1.5 2

identified

7. Three to five key study limitations are 0 1.5 2

identified

8. Addresses WHY issues are considered 0 1.5 2

strengths and limitations

9. Correctly interprets clinical 0 1.5 2

significance in study critique

10. Appropriately identifies specific 0 1.5 2

patient populations to which study
results apply in clinical impact

11. Draws appropriate conclusion 0 1.5 2

incorporating #6, 7, and 8

Style U S O
12. Information presented at an 0 1.5 2
appropriate pace

13. Discussion is well-organized 0 1.5 2

14. Professional language and 0 1.5 2

terminology is demonstrated

15. Responds appropriately to questions 0 1.5 2

from audience

Handout** U S O
16. Template completed in appropriate 0 1.5 2
detail considering page limit

17. Supports journal club (e.g., guides 0 1.5 2

discussion, supplements with details)

18. Professional in appearance (e.g., 0 1.5 2

formatting, errors minimized)

19. Appropriately referenced 0 1.5 2

20. Does not overly rely on handout 0 1.5 2

U: Unacceptable; S: Satisfactory; O: Outstanding *Teams earning fewer than 70% of content points will repeat the assignment. **Teams with
unprofessional handouts will re-do this aspect of the assignment at the discretion of the faculty instructor and course coordinator.
Students: Evaluator: Total: