Analysis on teaching evaluation of clinical clerkship at korean medical schools.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the teaching evaluation of clinical clerkship at Korean medical schools, and to suggest a desirable improvement for the clinical teaching evaluation in the future. METHODS: A questionnaire survey was conducted with a total of 9 multiple-choice questions and 1 essay-type question. The multiple-choice questions were analyzed by the frequency analysis using SPSS 17.0, and the essay-type question was coded by the content analysis. RESULTS: Survey results were as follows: First, clinical teaching evaluations via online (51.35%) were implemented once a year (94.59%) in most medical schools. Second, the self-made questionnaires by medical school (64.86%) rather than borrowing or adaptation (35.14%) were being used more often as teaching evaluation tool. Third, 37.84% medical schools used the specific form by class type, whereas 62.16% medical schools took the general form regardless of class type. Finally, evaluation tool (n=8), lack of concern and attention to teaching evaluation (n=4), formalities of evaluation (n=4), etc. were exposed as problems of clinical teaching evaluation. With regard to evaluation items, the development of specific questions was required. CONCLUSION: Teaching evaluation can be used as effective educational tools to improve the clinical clerkship program. To this end, clinical teaching evaluation tools reflecting the characteristics of clinical practice need to be developed.

Developing and testing an evaluation tool to measure clinical teaching.

PURPOSE: Teaching evaluation tools can be used to provide feedback to medical educators and help them improve their teaching skills. The purpose of this study was to develop a clinical teaching evaluation tool and test its efficacy. METHODS: The draft tool was developed based on clinical education literature and was modified by the stakeholder groups. To examine the quality of the instrument, content and construct validity, as well as reliability and fitness were analyzed. Content validity was tested by the stakeholder groups using a survey, and construct validity was verified by confirmatory factor analysis using LISREL 8.8. Internal consistency of items was assessed thorough Cronbach alpha estimation. Rasch analysis using Winstep 3.65 was performed to estimate the fitness of the tool. RESULTS: The resulting tool consisted of 4 large categories, 25 small categories, and 43 items. According to the test results, the average importance of all 43 items was 4.03 (3.63 to 4.29). Cronbach alpha was 0.9689, and the correlation coefficients between the items were high. With regard to construct validity, 10 items needed minor modifications in the category setting. As the infit (0.76 to 1.23) and outfit (0.75 to 1.40) indices show, 42 items were fit to the item response theory. CONCLUSION: The clinical teaching evaluation tool that has been developed in this study is valid and reliable and fits the item response theory. It can be used as an evaluation method in a variety of clinical teaching settings.

Investigation of the requirements of 'good teaching' to improve teaching professionalism in medical education.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to survey the awareness of faculty (F) and students (S) on 'good teaching' and to analyze an example of good lesson, finally to identify the requirements of 'good teaching' in medical education. METHODS: Quantitative and qualitative methods were applied simultaneously. First, survey using a questionnaire was analyzed by frequency analysis and verified using chi-square-test, Mann-Whitney test. Second, the case of good teaching and qualitative data were analyzed by 'priori codes coding' and 'open coding'. RESULTS: The results of survey are as follows: Both faculty and students regarded lessons that taught important content easy to understand (F: 50%; S: 69.1%); Lessons that allow students make sure important information (F: 48.6%; S: 51.4%); Lessons that prepare and plan considering the student's level and interest (F: m=3.78; S: m=3.76) were good lessons. Faculty wanted lessons that improve student's academic achievement (35.7%), while students choose lessons that deliver curriculum effectively using appropriate teaching method (47.1%). According to the results of case analysis, it turned out that characteristics of good teaching were as follows: Thorough plan and preparation of content, various teaching methods and materials, encouragement of intellectual inquiry and curiosity, active interaction between faculty and students, clear feedback and reasonable evaluation. CONCLUSION: Requirements of good teaching are open to faculty at school of medicine and are to be utilized as guidelines to monitor and improve their instruction.