Hendricson W D, Katz M S, Hoy L J
Division of Instructional Development, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio.
J Med Educ. 1988 Oct;63(10):762-74. doi: 10.1097/00001888-198810000-00004.
A 27-item questionnaire was sent to 144 U.S. and Canadian medical schools to identify prevailing patterns in the organization, philosophy, and function of curriculum committees. Overall, 76 percent responded, with 67 percent of the respondents being school administrators and 33 percent being faculty members. Fifty-one percent rated their school's committee as exerting a significant impact on the educational program over the previous five years. Fifty-six percent of the committees had a routine procedure for course review and used data from multiple sources when conducting curriculum evaluations. The committees that annually received a specific assignment from the dean were the most likely (91 percent) to be rated as having a significant impact, followed by committees that conducted frequent course reviews (66 percent). Thirty-eight percent of the committees were primarily faculty oriented, 29 percent were decidedly administrative in composition, and the remaining committees exhibited a mixture of membership.
一份包含27个项目的调查问卷被发送给了144所美国和加拿大的医学院校,以确定课程委员会在组织、理念和职能方面的普遍模式。总体而言,76%的院校做出了回应,其中67%的受访者是学校管理人员,33%是教师。51%的受访者认为他们学校的委员会在过去五年对教育项目产生了重大影响。56%的委员会有课程审查的常规程序,并且在进行课程评估时使用来自多个来源的数据。每年从院长那里接到特定任务的委员会最有可能(91%)被评为有重大影响,其次是经常进行课程审查的委员会(66%)。38%的委员会主要以教师为导向,29%的委员会成员构成明显偏向行政人员,其余委员会的成员构成则兼而有之。