National survey of evaluation practices and performance-guided resource allocation at German medical schools.

Q1 Medicine
GMS German Medical Science Pub Date : 2019-04-18 eCollection Date: 2019-01-01 DOI:10.3205/000270
Sarah Schiekirka-Schwake, Janina Barth, Josef Pfeilschifter, Reinhard Hickel, Tobias Raupach, Christoph Herrmann-Lingen
{"title":"National survey of evaluation practices and performance-guided resource allocation at German medical schools.","authors":"Sarah Schiekirka-Schwake,&nbsp;Janina Barth,&nbsp;Josef Pfeilschifter,&nbsp;Reinhard Hickel,&nbsp;Tobias Raupach,&nbsp;Christoph Herrmann-Lingen","doi":"10.3205/000270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Little is known about evaluation practices as well as performance-oriented allocation of resources according to teaching quality at German medical schools. For this reason, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the German Association of Medical Faculties aimed to analyse current practices at German medical schools. <b>Methods:</b> Data were collected by a questionnaire which was sent to all medical schools in Germany. <b>Results:</b> 30 medical schools with 33 undergraduate medical programs participated in the survey (response rate: 83%). The evaluation tools used at these schools mainly assessed structural and procedural aspects of teaching and were designed to obtain overall student ratings of teaching quality. Evaluation tools were quite heterogeneous across the sample, and some uncertainty remained with regard to the psychometric properties of these tools and whether they meet international quality standards. Various algorithms underlying resource allocation for teaching are being used, but most focus on quantity rather than quality of teaching. <b>Conclusion:</b> A nationwide agreement on a generalizable definition of high-quality teaching is desirable. At the same time, reliable and valid tools measuring teaching quality need to be identified and/or created. This could be accomplished through a wider collaboration of medical schools and could represent an advancement for the allocation of resources for high-quality teaching.</p>","PeriodicalId":39243,"journal":{"name":"GMS German Medical Science","volume":"17 ","pages":"Doc04"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6533543/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS German Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/000270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Little is known about evaluation practices as well as performance-oriented allocation of resources according to teaching quality at German medical schools. For this reason, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the German Association of Medical Faculties aimed to analyse current practices at German medical schools. Methods: Data were collected by a questionnaire which was sent to all medical schools in Germany. Results: 30 medical schools with 33 undergraduate medical programs participated in the survey (response rate: 83%). The evaluation tools used at these schools mainly assessed structural and procedural aspects of teaching and were designed to obtain overall student ratings of teaching quality. Evaluation tools were quite heterogeneous across the sample, and some uncertainty remained with regard to the psychometric properties of these tools and whether they meet international quality standards. Various algorithms underlying resource allocation for teaching are being used, but most focus on quantity rather than quality of teaching. Conclusion: A nationwide agreement on a generalizable definition of high-quality teaching is desirable. At the same time, reliable and valid tools measuring teaching quality need to be identified and/or created. This could be accomplished through a wider collaboration of medical schools and could represent an advancement for the allocation of resources for high-quality teaching.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

德国医学院评价实践和绩效导向资源分配的全国调查。
背景:德国医学院的教学质量评估实践以及以绩效为导向的资源分配知之甚少。为此,德国科学医学学会协会和德国医学院协会旨在分析德国医学院目前的做法。方法:采用问卷调查法对德国各医学院进行问卷调查。结果:共有30所医学院33个本科医学专业参与调查,回复率为83%。这些学校使用的评价工具主要评估教学的结构和程序方面,目的是获得学生对教学质量的总体评价。评估工具在整个样本中是相当异质的,并且在这些工具的心理测量特性以及它们是否符合国际质量标准方面仍然存在一些不确定性。教学资源分配的各种算法正在被使用,但大多数都侧重于教学的数量而不是质量。结论:在全国范围内就高质量教学的广义定义达成一致是可取的。与此同时,需要确定和/或创建可靠和有效的衡量教学质量的工具。这可以通过医学院之间更广泛的合作来实现,并可能是为高质量教学分配资源的一种进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
GMS German Medical Science
GMS German Medical Science Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书