This essay advocates for the wholesale reevaluation of the process used by American medical schools for selecting physicians, examining fundamental questions such as the purpose of physicians and the nature of meritocracy. It raises questions about the size of medical school classes, the specific academic requirements, and the inadequacy of current efforts to increase diversity. Ultimately, the essay argues for consideration of a range of reforms that will focus on the community-empowering aspects of medical admissions decisions.

Introduction: Engaging residents across a multiyear training spectrum is challenging given the heterogeneity of experience and limited time available for educational activities. A “flipped classroom” model, in which residents prepare ahead of time for mentored topic discussions, has potential advantages. Methods: We implemented a curriculum consisting of topics distributed across the specialty. Weekly, each resident was randomly assigned to research a specific aspect of an assigned topic appropriate to his or her level of experience: junior residents about what characterizes each clinical entity, midlevel residents about when to intervene, and chief residents about how to administer treatment. Residents completed an anonymous survey 6 months after implementation. Board examination performance was assessed before and after implementation. Results: A total of 12 residents participated in the program. Weekly, 1.75±0.40 hours were spent in preparation, with senior residents reporting less time than junior residents. All residents indicated that the accumulation of experience across 7 years of residency was a major advantage of this program, and all preferred it to lectures. Performance on the board examination significantly increased after implementation (from 316±36 to 468±45, p<0.05). Conclusions: The flipped classroom is a viable approach to resident education and is associated with increased engagement and improved performance using validated knowledge-assessment tools.