A fresh look at Miller's pyramid: assessment at the ‘Is ’ and ‘Do ’ levels

In its silver jubilee, we celebrate the ground‐breaking pyramid of George Miller by submitting a fresh look at it. We discuss two questions. (i) Does the classical pyramidal structure perfectly portray the relationships of the four levels that were described by Miller? (ii) Can the model of Miller fulfill the unmet needs of assessors to measure evolving essential constructs and accommodate the increasingly sophisticated practice of assessment of health professionals? In response to the first question, Miller's pyramid is revisited in view of two assumptions for pyramidal structures, namely: hierarchy and tapering. Then we suggest different configurations for the same classical four levels and indicate when to use each one. With regard to the second question, we provide a rationale for amending the pyramid with two further dimensions to assess personal qualities of students at the ‘ Is ’ level and their performance in teams at the ‘ Do ’ (together) level. At the end of the article, we yearn to think outside the pyramid and suggest the Assessment Orbits framework to assess students as individuals and in teams. The five Assessment Orbits alert educators to assess the emerging cognitive and non‐cognitive constructs, without implying features such as hierarchy or tapering that are ingrained in pyramidal structures. The ‘ Is ’ orbit attends to the personal qualities of graduates ‘who’ we may (or may not) trust to be our physicians. Assessment of teams at the ‘ Do ’ level (together) offers a paradigm shift in assessment from competitive ranking (storming) among students toward norming and performing as teams.