Kelly Martina, Bennett Deirdre, Muijtjens Arno, O'Flynn Siun, Dornan Tim
Department of Family Medicine, University of Calgary, HSC G324B, 3330 Hospital Drive N.W., Calgary, AB, T2N 2N1, Canada.
Medical Education Unit, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015 Oct;20(4):1027-32. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4. Epub 2015 Jan 10.
Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a de facto standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were developed by consensus. Reasoning that an instrument would perform best if it were underpinned by a clearly conceptualized link between environment and learning as well as psychometric evidence, we developed the mixed methods Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI), eliminated redundant items, and published validity evidence for its 8 item and 2 subscale structure. Here, we set out to compare MCPI with DREEM. 104 students on full-time clinical placements completed both measures three times during a single academic year. There was good agreement and at least as good discrimination between placements with the smaller MCPI. Total MCPI scores and the mean score of its 5-item learning environment subscale allowed ten raters to distinguish between the quality of educational environments. Twenty raters were needed for the 3-item MCPI training subscale and the DREEM scale and its subscales. MCPI compares favourably with DREEM in that one-sixth the number of items perform at least as well psychometrically, it provides formative free text data, and it is founded on the widely shared assumption that communities of practice make good learning environments.
临床实习生学到的比教给他们的更多,而且并非所有学到的东西都能被衡量。因此,课程负责人会对临床教育环境进行评估。定量的邓迪就绪环境量表(DREEM)实际上是用于此目的的标准。其50个项目和5个分量表是通过共识制定的。我们认为,如果一种工具以环境与学习之间清晰概念化的联系以及心理测量证据为基础,那么它的表现会最佳,于是我们开发了混合方法的曼彻斯特临床实习指数(MCPI),剔除了冗余项目,并公布了其8个项目和2个分量表结构的效度证据。在此,我们着手将MCPI与DREEM进行比较。104名参加全日制临床实习的学生在一个学年内三次完成了这两种量表的测评。MCPI量表项目较少,但一致性良好,对不同实习环境的区分度至少与DREEM相当。MCPI的总分及其5个项目的学习环境分量表的平均分使10名评分者能够区分教育环境的质量。而对于3个项目的MCPI培训分量表以及DREEM量表及其分量表,则需要20名评分者。MCPI与DREEM相比具有优势,因为其六分之一数量的项目在心理测量方面表现至少同样出色,它提供形成性的自由文本数据,并且它基于广泛认同的假设,即实践社区能营造良好的学习环境。