ABSTRACT
Crossborder curriculum partnerships are a relatively new and fast-growing form of internationalization in which the curriculum that has been developed by one institution (the home institution) crosses borders and is implemented in another institution (the host institution). These partnerships aim to provide comparable learning experiences to the students in both institutions and are driven by a variety of motives, such as strengthening international networks, increasing financial gains, and stimulating research spinoffs. Although popular, crossborder curriculum partnerships are also criticized for their potentially low educational quality, failing to address fundamental differences in teaching and learning between the home and host institutions, and not addressing the educational needs of the host country's health care system. Our aim is to provide guidance to those considering or engaged in designing, developing, managing, and reviewing a crossborder curriculum partnership or other forms of international educational partnerships in medical education. Drawing from research, personal, and institutional experiences in this area, we listed twelve tips categorized into four themes, which contribute to the establishment of sustainable partnerships that can withstand the aforementioned criticism.
Subject(s)
Curriculum , Education, Medical, Undergraduate/organization & administration , Internationality , Quality Control , Communication , Cooperative Behavior , Cultural Competency , Education, Medical, Undergraduate/standards , Faculty, Medical/organization & administration , Humans , Interpersonal Relations , Language , Problem-Based Learning , Program Development , Program Evaluation , Staff Development/organization & administrationABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: A new form of internationalization has been trending upward in the medical education realm: crossborder medical curriculum partnerships established to deliver the same, or adapted, curriculum to groups of geographically separated students. This study aims to investigate crossborder medical curriculum partnerships by exploring the experiences of teachers at the recipient institution who have a key role in delivering the program. METHODS: From four pioneering recipient medical schools, 24 teachers participated in a Q-sort study. Each participant rank-ordered 42 statements about teaching in a crossborder medical curriculum on a scale from -5 (indicating strong disagreement) to +5 (indicating strong agreement). The authors conducted a "by-person" factor analysis to uncover distinct patterns in the ranking of statements, using the statistical results and participants' comments about their Q sorts to interpret these patterns and translate them into distinct viewpoints. RESULTS: Three viewpoints emerged, reflecting: (1) a feeling of connectedness with the partner institution, trust in the quality of the curriculum, and appreciation of interinstitutional relationships; (2) the partnership's attractiveness because of the career opportunities it offers; and (3) concerns over the quality of graduates because of doubts about the appropriateness of the didactic model and insufficient attention to local healthcare needs, and over the practical feasibility of such partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: The three viewpoints identified revealed a pallet of views on how host teachers might experience their work. It shows the heterogeneous features of this group and seems to counterbalance reports that they are feeling "deprived" from their role as teacher. Two viewpoints featured an appreciation of interinstitutional relationships and of the partnership, especially when perceiving a degree of autonomy. Partners can capitalize on all different viewpoints by deploying procedure and policies to raise the quality of education delivery.
Subject(s)
Attitude , Education, Medical, Undergraduate/methods , Faculty, Medical/psychology , Interinstitutional Relations , Internationality , Curriculum , Female , Humans , Male , Schools, MedicalABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Worldwide, medical schools have entered into crossborder curriculum partnerships (CCPs) to provide equivalent curricula and learning experiences to groups of geographically separated students. Paradoxically, this process also involves adaptation of curricula to suit local contexts. This study has focused on challenges faced by medical Crossborder curriculum programme directors and strategies they employed to overcome these. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study on six CCPs using document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 13 programme directors from 12 medical schools. Interview transcripts were coded iteratively, followed by cross-case analysis. RESULTS: The challenges faced by CCP programme directors are four-fold, springing from differences in health care systems, legislation and political interference, teaching and learning environments, and partnership. Deliberate strategies, such as intensifying interactions between partners in all academic echelons, can help to overcome these. Partnerships vary in their setup and collaboration strategy. CONCLUSION: Medical CCPs are challenging though seem feasible. Partnerships with more solid integration of academic operations appear robust in terms of ownership and provide, besides financial, also academic advantages to both institutions. However, more research is needed on the long-term effects on quality of graduates and impact on the host health care system.
