RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare reading skills of dietetic interns with reading levels of internship references. DESIGN: A standardized reading test, the Nelson-Denny Reading Test, measured reading skills of entering dietetic interns over 7 years. A computerized readability program assessed the readability of references. SETTING: Dietetic internships in university and Veterans Affairs hospitals. SUBJECTS: Of 194 entering interns, 178 (92%) were included and 16 (89%) were omitted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nelson-Denny percentile and grade equivalent scores for vocabulary, comprehension, and total. The Fog Index identified reference reading-grade levels. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED: Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. RESULTS: Interns from the two programs did not differ significantly on Nelson-Denny Reading Test scores or in application grade point average. Percentile means and standard deviations were 54.7 +/- 23.8 for vocabulary, 51.2 +/- 25.0 for comprehension, 52.9 +/- 23.9 for total, and 41.6 +/- 24.7 for reading rate. Nearly 20% (33 of 178) of interns read significantly below expected grade level. The fog Index assigned reference grade levels from 6.98 to 21.63 years. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of dietetic interns have strong reading skills and read within the references' reading levels. A minority may experience difficulties reading assignments. Preinternship reading skills assessment could lead to greater success in reading professional literature.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Although the letter of recommendation is the most commonly requested information relating to the personal qualities of applicants to dietetics internship programs, little research has focused on its value in selection decisions. The purpose of this study was to review how 318 letters of recommendation submitted on a standardized form related to the source of the reference and to the admission status of the applicants. The form contained 40 attributes that raters assigned to one of six categories. Nine of the 40 attributes were not rated by more than 75% of the raters, and 3 of the attributes were rated as outstanding by more than 60% of the raters. We concluded that these attributes did little to distinguish among applicants. The attribute maturity correlated 0.70 with 5 attributes and 0.99 with 2 attributes, so duplication of information existed. Raters were categorized as follows: adviser, major professor, other professor, employer, and other. The highest mean ratings were given by advisers; major professors rated students lowest. Analysis of variance supported a significant difference in rating by type of rater. Our findings suggest that fewer items should be used on a standardized form and that the type of rater should be specified if references are to distinguish among applicants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

With declining college enrollment, the health professions, including dietetics, are recognizing a need to assess and monitor student selection more closely. In this survey of 102 dietetic internship programs, program directors and a sample of their faculty members were asked to describe their current selection practices and to identify the beliefs they hold about the information obtained from various components of their procedures. Differences in beliefs between program directors and other faculty members were compared by t-test analysis. The five major categories of internship selection procedures are presented with information items faculty members believe are derived from each category, and the results are compared with those of previous surveys of dietetic selection practices. Major findings are that the intern selection process has changed significantly since 1978, with greater emphasis on work experience and extracurricular activities; the number of applicants per position has doubled despite a doubling of dietetic internship programs; and program directors and faculty members agree on the major selection practices but not on the information obtained from a given category. In the discussion, the findings are evaluated against a broad background of health profession education literature; implications are raised for intern selection committees and for the applicant.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)