Research in Education, VUmc School of Medical Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
LEARN! research institute for learning and education, Faculty of Psychology and Education, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Perspect Med Educ. 2018 Feb;7(1):54-57. doi: 10.1007/s40037-017-0398-1.
High stakes are involved in student selection, for both medical schools and applicants. This thesis investigated the effects of selection on the medical student population and applicant pool in the Dutch setting.
This thesis consists of six papers: two quantitative studies, one qualitative study, two mixed methods studies and one perspective paper based on a review of the literature.
(1) Compared with a lottery, selection does not result in a student population with better motivation, engagement and performance, both in the clinical and pre-clinical phases of the study. (2) Selection seems to have a temporary stimulating effect on student motivation through enhancing perceived autonomy, competence and relatedness. (3) Applicants adopt a strategic approach, based on the selection procedure, in their choice of medical school. (4) The description of an applicant's motivation is not a reliable and valid tool to assess motivation during selection. (5) Gaining healthcare experience is crucial for applicants' motivation, but inequalities in access to such experiences can demotivate certain student groups from applying to medical school. (6) The gains yielded from selection compared with a lottery seem to be small. Unintentionally induced self-selection among certain groups of students and biased selection procedures may compromise student diversity.
The added value of selection procedures compared with a weighted lottery for admitting students to medical school is questionable. Students are generally motivated and perform well, irrespective of how they enrolled in medical school. Selection yields only small gains, while student diversity may be hampered.
学生选拔对医学院和申请人来说都存在高风险。本论文研究了在荷兰背景下,选拔对医学生群体和申请人库的影响。
本论文由六篇论文组成:两篇定量研究、一篇定性研究、两篇混合方法研究和一篇基于文献综述的观点论文。
(1)与抽签相比,选拔并没有导致学生群体在学习的临床和预备临床阶段具有更好的动机、参与度和表现。(2)选拔似乎通过增强感知自主性、能力感和关联性,对学生的动机产生了暂时的刺激作用。(3)申请人通过基于选拔程序的策略性方法来选择医学院。(4)申请人的动机描述不是评估选拔过程中动机的可靠和有效工具。(5)获得医疗保健经验对申请人的动机至关重要,但获得这种经验的机会不平等可能会使某些学生群体失去申请医学院的动力。(6)与抽签相比,选拔带来的收益似乎很小。某些学生群体的无意自选择和有偏见的选拔程序可能会损害学生的多样性。
与加权抽签相比,选拔程序对录取医学生的附加价值值得怀疑。无论他们如何进入医学院,学生通常都有动力并且表现良好。选拔只产生了很小的收益,而学生的多样性可能会受到阻碍。