- Prince George
Dr. Gingerich joined the Northern Medical Program in 2006 as a small group learning facilitator within years 1 and 2 of the undergraduate medical curriculum. She has since become involved with recruiting, scheduling, and providing faculty development for small group learning facilitators. Her doctoral studies challenged the rater idiosyncrasy explanation for error variance by identifying multiple clusters of consensus within physicians’ variable clinical assessment judgments of a single trainee. She previously completed a master’s degree in medical education with a thesis focussing on assessment in problem-based learning. Prior to 2006 she was sole owner and operator of a multidisciplinary clinic in rural Ontario where she practised as a naturopathic doctor.
Research and Expertise
Andrea’s research is driven by a fascination with how people think. Her curiosity was piqued by noticing variability in the assessment judgments made for a given medical trainee. Her studies revealed more than one point of view within the variability with many people aligning with each of those perspectives rather than everyone having their own idiosyncratic point of view. The initial search to better understand variable assessment judgments and ratings has led to multiple lines of research each investigating differing perspectives on a shared experience. It includes collaborative research identifying various dynamic supervision approaches used by physicians in clinical teaching units on internal medicine wards and ongoing research into physician supervisors’ understandings of trainee underperformance. Lines of research have also extended into studying how practitioners navigate ethical issues while living and practising in rural, northern, and remote communities given that the standards of conduct generated through urban practice may not be sufficient to guide their decisions. Assessment, clinical supervision, and professional practice are areas where Andrea studies variability in judgments by identifying and analyzing differing perspectives through a social cognition lens.Research Fields:
- Rural Health Services
Rater cognition, workplace-based assessment, performance assessment, clinical supervision, entrustment, small group learning, rural health ethicsLanguages Spoken:
MHPE-Canada - https://ches.med.ubc.ca/programs/mhpe-canada/
Gingerich, A., (2015). Questioning the rater idiosyncrasy explanation for error variance by searching for multiple signals within the noise. Datawyse: Universitaire Pers Maastricht. 180 pages. ISBN 9789461594556
Gingerich, A., (2015). Commentary: What if the ‘trust’ in entrustable were a social judgment? Medical Education. 49:748-754.
Gingerich, A., Kogan, J., Yeates, P., Govaerts, M., & Holmboe, E. (2014). Seeing the ‘black box’ differently: assessor cognition from three research perspectives. Medical Education. 48:1055-1068.
Gingerich, A., van der Vleuten, C.P.M., Eva, K.W., & Regehr, G. (2014). More consensus than idiosyncrasy: Categorizing social judgments to examine variability in Mini-CEX ratings. Academic Medicine. 89(11):1-10.
Gingerich, A., Regehr, G., & Eva, K. (2011). Rater-based assessments as social judgments: Rethinking the etiology of rater errors. Academic Medicine. 86(10 Suppl): S1-S7.