Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Gd. Prof. Drs. Med. R. Radiopoetro, Lt. 6 Sayap Barat, Jl. Farmako, Sekip Utara, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia.
Center for Education Development and Research in Health Professions, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
BMC Med Educ. 2020 May 8;20(1):144. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02062-z.
Cultural differences might challenge the acceptance of the implementation of assessment formats that are developed in other countries. Acceptance of assessment formats is essential for its effectiveness; therefore, we explored the views of students and specialists on the practicality and impact on learning of these formats. This study was conducted to explore Indonesian students' and specialists' appreciation of the implementation of the Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) in Indonesian clerkships.
This study was conducted at the Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. Participants were 52 students and 21 specialists in neurology and 78 students and 50 specialists in internal medicine. They were asked to complete a 19-item questionnaire that covered the characteristics of the mini-CEX such as its practicality, and the impact on learning and professional development. We used a Mann-Whitney U test to analyse the data.
In total, 124 students (46 from neurology and 78 from internal medicine) and 38 specialists (13 from neurology and 25 from internal medicine) participated in this study. Students and specialists were positive about the practicality of the mini-CEX and the impact of this assessment format on learning and on professional development. The Mann-Whitney U test showed that there were no significant differences between students' and specialists' opinions on the mini-CEX, except for 2 items: specialists' appreciation of direct observation (mean rank = 93.16) was statistically significantly higher than students' appreciation of it (mean rank = 77.93; z = 2.065; p < 0.05), but students' appreciation of the item that students' past mini-CEX results affected their recent mini-CEX outcomes (mean rank = 85.29) was significantly higher than specialists' appreciation of it (mean rank = 69.12; z = 2140; p < 0.05).
Students and specialists were positive about the mini-CEX in Indonesian clerkships, although it was developed and validated in another culture. We found only small differences between their appreciations, which could be explained by the patterns of specialist-student interaction in Indonesian culture as large power distance and low individualism country.
文化差异可能会对在其他国家开发的评估格式的接受产生挑战。评估格式的接受对于其有效性至关重要;因此,我们探讨了学生和专家对这些格式的实用性和对学习的影响的看法。本研究旨在探讨印度尼西亚学生和专家对印度尼西亚实习中微型临床评估练习(Mini-CEX)实施的看法。
本研究在印度尼西亚的加查马达大学进行。参与者包括 52 名学生和 21 名神经病学专家以及 78 名学生和 50 名内科专家。他们被要求完成一份包含 Mini-CEX 特征的 19 项问卷,例如其实用性以及对学习和专业发展的影响。我们使用曼-惠特尼 U 检验来分析数据。
共有 124 名学生(神经病学 46 名,内科 78 名)和 38 名专家(神经病学 13 名,内科 25 名)参加了这项研究。学生和专家对 Mini-CEX 的实用性以及这种评估格式对学习和专业发展的影响持积极态度。曼-惠特尼 U 检验显示,学生和专家对 Mini-CEX 的看法没有显著差异,只有 2 项除外:专家对直接观察的评价(平均秩=93.16)明显高于学生的评价(平均秩=77.93;Z=2.065;P<0.05),但学生对过去 Mini-CEX 结果影响最近 Mini-CEX 结果的项目的评价明显高于专家(平均秩=85.29;Z=2140;P<0.05)。
尽管 Mini-CEX 是在另一种文化中开发和验证的,但印度尼西亚实习中的学生和专家对它持积极态度。我们发现他们的评价之间只有很小的差异,这可以用印度尼西亚文化中专家与学生互动的模式来解释,因为印度尼西亚是一个权力距离大、个人主义程度低的国家。