Korean Medical Education Review (의학교육논단)

Yonsei university college of medicine (연세대학교 의과대학)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluation of Process and Satisfaction for Selective Courses in a Medical School

의과대학 선택교육과정의 운영절차와 만족도 평가

  • Kim, Do-Hwan (Department of Medical Education, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Young-Hyu (Department of Medical Education, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Han, Sang Yun (Division of Longevity and Biofunctional Medicine, School of Korean Medicine, Pusan National University) ;
  • Shin, Jwa-Seop (Department of Medical Education, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Seunghee (Department of Medical Education, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
  • 김도환 (서울대학교 의과대학 의학교육학교실) ;
  • 최영휴 (서울대학교 의과대학 의학교육학교실) ;
  • 한상윤 (부산대학교 한의학전문대학원 양생기능의학부) ;
  • 신좌섭 (서울대학교 의과대학 의학교육학교실) ;
  • 이승희 (서울대학교 의과대학 의학교육학교실)
  • Received : 2017.01.20
  • Accepted : 2017.06.07
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The necessity of embracing selective courses in medical curriculum is increasing due to the expansion of medical knowledge and changes in the health care environment. In contrast to the abundant evidence regarding elective or selective courses during the clinical phase, articles focusing on the preclinical period are relatively scarce. This study aims to explore the development, implementation, and evaluation of newly-adopted selective courses in the first-year medical curriculum in a medical school which recently underwent a major curricular revision. First of all, the Curriculum Committee established goals and operating principles of the courses, and then the committee encouraged all participating professors to attend a related faculty development workshop after finalizing the list of courses. A survey was conducted at the end of each course for evaluation. Of the 36 courses opened in 2016, the overall satisfaction of students was $4.98{\pm}1.06$ (out of 6) and showed a strong correlation with students' previous expectations, reasoning- and participation-oriented teaching, and outcome of the courses including increased motivation. In the open-ended responses, students and professors described not only intended outcomes such as acquisition of medical knowledge and increased interest in new topics, but also unintended outcomes including positive impression for selective courses and even high satisfaction and rewarding experiences, especially from the teachers' perspective. Although long-term outcomes remain to be seen, the results of this study show the feasibility and impact of selective courses and will contribute to effective implementation in other medical schools.

Keywords

References

  1. Kim YJ, Lim CI. Competency-based medical education: possibilities and limitations. Korean Med Educ Rev. 2011;13(1):13-23. https://doi.org/10.17496/KMER.2011.13.1.013
  2. Riley SC. Student selected components (SSCs): AMEE guide no 46. Med Teach. 2009;31(10):885-94. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421590903261096
  3. O'Tuathaigh CM, Duggan E, Khashan AS, Boylan GB, O'Flynn S. Selection of student-selected component [SSCs] modules across the medical undergraduate curriculum: relationship with motivational factors. Med Teach. 2012;34(10):813-20. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.701025
  4. Yoon BY, Choi I, Kim S, Park H, Ju H, Rhee BD, et al. Recommendations for the successful design and implementation of competency-based medical education in Korea. Korean Med Educ Rev. 2015;17(3):110-21. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.2015.17.3.110
  5. An JH, Kwon I, Lee SN, Han JJ, Jeong JE. Study on the medical humanities and social sciences curriculum in Korean medical school: current teaching status and learning subjects. Korean J Med Educ. 2008; 20(2):133-44. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2008.20.2.133
  6. Kim SH, Yang EB, Ahn DS, Jeon WT, Lyu CJ. The present conditions of clinical clerkship management in Korea. Korean J Med Educ. 2009;21(4):373-83. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2009.21.4.373
  7. Hwang J, Lee SH, Kim SJ, Shin JS, Yoon HB, Kim DH, et al. A study on premedical curriculum reform of one medical school. Korean J Med Educ. 2013;25(4):299-308. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2013.25.4.299
  8. An S, Bu S. Reflection on the experience of medical professionalism education at Yonsei University College of Medicine. Korean Med Educ Rev. 2012;14(1):25-36. https://doi.org/10.17496/KMER.2012.14.1.025
  9. Cook DA. Twelve tips for evaluating educational programs. Med Teach. 2010;32(4):296-301. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421590903480121
  10. Riley SC, Ferrell WR, Gibbs TJ, Murphy MJ, Cairns W, Smith S. Twelve tips for developing and sustaining a programme of student selected components. Med Teach. 2008;30(4):370-6. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590801965145
  11. Gerrity MS, Mahaffy J. Evaluating change in medical school curricula: how did we know where we were going? Acad Med. 1998;73(9 Suppl): S55-9.
  12. Haji F, Morin MP, Parker K. Rethinking programme evaluation in health professions education: beyond 'did it work?'. Med Educ. 2013;47(4): 342-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12091
  13. Muller JH, Jain S, Loeser H, Irby DM. Lessons learned about integrating a medical school curriculum: perceptions of students, faculty and curriculum leaders. Med Educ. 2008;42(8):778-85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03110.x
  14. Bates R. A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence. Eval Program Plan. 2004;27(3):341-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.011
  15. Mahboob U, Evans P. Key steps for managing changes in the curriculum. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2015;25(2):85-6.
  16. Bland CJ, Starnaman S, Wersal L, Moorehead-Rosenberg L, Zonia S, Henry R. Curricular change in medical schools: how to succeed. Acad Med. 2000;75(6):575-94. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200006000-00006
  17. Lee H, Yang EB. A study on the characteristics of excellent lecturers in medical school. Korean J Med Educ. 2013;25(1):47-53. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2013.25.1.47
  18. Woloschuk W, Coderre S, Wright B, McLaughlin K. What factors affect students' overall ratings of a course? Acad Med. 2011;86(5):640-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318212c1b6
  19. Creedy DK, Mitchell M, Seaton-Sykes P, Cooke M, Patterson E, Purcell C, et al. Evaluating a web-enhanced bachelor of nursing curriculum: perspectives of third-year students. J Nurs Educ. 2007;46(10):460-7.
  20. Sun PC, Tsai RJ, Finger G, Chen YY, Yeh D. What drives a successful e-learning?: an empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comput Educ. 2008;50(4):1183-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.11.007
  21. Miettola J, Mantyselka P, Vaskilampi T. Doctor-patient interaction in Finnish primary health care as perceived by first year medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5:34. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-5-34
  22. Rabadan FE, Hidalgo JL. Changes in the knowledge of and attitudes toward family medicine after completing a primary care course. Fam Med. 2010;42(1):35-40.
  23. Murdoch-Eaton D, Ellershaw J, Garden A, Newble D, Perry M, Robinson L, et al. Student-selected components in the undergraduate medical curriculum: a multi-institutional consensus on purpose. Med Teach. 2004; 26(1):33-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159032000150494
  24. De Jong Z, van Nies JA, Peters SW, Vink S, Dekker FW, Scherpbier A. Interactive seminars or small group tutorials in preclinical medical education: results of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ. 2010;10:79. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-79
  25. Edmunds S, Brown G. Effective small group learning: AMEE guide no. 48. Med Teach. 2010;32(9):715-26. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2010.505454