Schiekirka Sarah, Feufel Markus A, Herrmann-Lingen Christoph, Raupach Tobias
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Studiendekanat, Göttingen, Germany.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Prodekanat für Studium und Lehre, Berlin, Germany ; Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung, Forschungsbereich Adaptives Verhalten und Kognition und Harding Zentrum für Risikokommunikation, Berlin, Germany.
Ger Med Sci. 2015 Sep 16;13:Doc15. doi: 10.3205/000219. eCollection 2015.
Evaluation is an integral part of education in German medical schools. According to the quality standards set by the German Society for Evaluation, evaluation tools must provide an accurate and fair appraisal of teaching quality. Thus, data collection tools must be highly reliable and valid. This review summarises the current literature on evaluation of medical education with regard to the possible dimensions of teaching quality, the psychometric properties of survey instruments and potential confounding factors.
We searched Pubmed, PsycINFO and PSYNDEX for literature on evaluation in medical education and included studies published up until June 30, 2011 as well as articles identified in the "grey literature". RESULTS are presented as a narrative review.
We identified four dimensions of teaching quality: structure, process, teacher characteristics, and outcome. Student ratings are predominantly used to address the first three dimensions, and a number of reliable tools are available for this purpose. However, potential confounders of student ratings pose a threat to the validity of these instruments. Outcome is usually operationalised in terms of student performance on examinations, but methodological problems may limit the usability of these data for evaluation purposes. In addition, not all examinations at German medical schools meet current quality standards.
The choice of tools for evaluating medical education should be guided by the dimension that is targeted by the evaluation. Likewise, evaluation results can only be interpreted within the context of the construct addressed by the data collection tool that was used as well as its specific confounding factors.
评估是德国医学院校教育的一个重要组成部分。根据德国评估协会制定的质量标准,评估工具必须对教学质量进行准确且公正的评价。因此,数据收集工具必须具有高度的可靠性和有效性。本综述总结了当前关于医学教育评估的文献,内容涉及教学质量的可能维度、调查工具的心理测量特性以及潜在的混杂因素。
我们在PubMed、PsycINFO和PSYNDEX中搜索关于医学教育评估的文献,纳入截至2011年6月30日发表的研究以及“灰色文献”中识别出的文章。结果以叙述性综述的形式呈现。
我们确定了教学质量的四个维度:结构、过程、教师特征和结果。学生评分主要用于评估前三个维度,并且有许多可靠的工具可用于此目的。然而,学生评分的潜在混杂因素对这些工具的有效性构成了威胁。结果通常根据学生考试成绩来衡量,但方法学问题可能会限制这些数据在评估中的可用性。此外,德国医学院校并非所有考试都符合当前质量标准。
医学教育评估工具的选择应以评估所针对的维度为指导。同样,评估结果只能在所使用的数据收集工具所涉及的结构及其特定混杂因素的背景下进行解释。