Challenges and potential improvements in the Accreditation Standards of the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation 2019 (ASK2019) derived through meta-evaluation: a cross-sectional study
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: This study aimed to identify challenges and potential improvements in Korea’s medical education accreditation process according to the Accreditation Standards of the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation 2019 (ASK2019). Meta-evaluation was conducted to survey the experiences and perceptions of stakeholders, including self-assessment committee members, site visit committee members, administrative staff, and medical school professors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using surveys sent to 40 medical schools. The 332 participants included self-assessment committee members, site visitteam members, administrative staff, and medical school professors. The t-test, one-way analysis of variance and the chi-square test were used to analyze and compareopinions on medical education accreditation between the categories of participants. Results: Site visit committee members placed greater importance on the necessity of accreditation than faculty members. A shared positive view on accreditation’s role in improving educational quality was seen among self-evaluation committee members and professors. Administrative staff highly regarded the KoreanInstitute of Medical Education and Evaluation’s reliability and objectivity, unlike the self-evaluation committee members. Site visit committee members positively perceived the clarity of accreditation standards, differing from self-assessment committee members. Administrative staff were most optimistic about implementing standards. However, the accreditation process encountered challenges, especially in duplicating content and preparing self-evaluation reports. Finally, perceptions regarding the accuracy of final site visit reports varied significantly between the self-evaluation committee members and the site visit committeemembers. Conclusion: This study revealed diverse views on medical education accreditation, highlighting the need for improved communication, expectation alignment, andstakeholder collaboration to refine the accreditation process and quality.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to identify challenges and potential improvements in Korea’s medical education accreditation process according to the Accreditation Standards of the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation 2019 (ASK2019). Meta-evaluation was conducted to survey the experiences and perceptions of stakeholders, including self-assessment committee members, site visit committee members, administrative staff, and medical school professors. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using surveys sent to 40 medical schools. The 332 participants included self-assessment committee members, site visitteam members, administrative staff, and medical school professors. The t-test, one-way analysis of variance and the chi-square test were used to analyze and compareopinions on medical education accreditation between the categories of participants. Results: Site visit committee members placed greater importance on the necessity of accreditation than faculty members. A shared positive view on accreditation’s role in improving educational quality was seen among self-evaluation committee members and professors. Administrative staff highly regarded the KoreanInstitute of Medical Education and Evaluation’s reliability and objectivity, unlike the self-evaluation committee members. Site visit committee members positively perceived the clarity of accreditation standards, differing from self-assessment committee members. Administrative staff were most optimistic about implementing standards. However, the accreditation process encountered challenges, especially in duplicating content and preparing self-evaluation reports. Finally, perceptions regarding the accuracy of final site visit reports varied significantly between the self-evaluation committee members and the site visit committeemembers. Conclusion: This study revealed diverse views on medical education accreditation, highlighting the need for improved communication, expectation alignment, andstakeholder collaboration to refine the accreditation process and quality.
참고문헌 (17)
- Meng KH, "The history and implications of the Medical Education Accreditation System in Korea : implementation and activities in early stages", Korean Med Educ Rev, 22, pp.1~8 (2020)[DOI]
- Lim KY, "A proposal for the future of medical education accreditation in Korea", J Educ Eval Health Prof, 17, pp.32~ (2020)[DOI]
- Kim YC, "Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation Presidential Address : the role of KIMEE as a medical education accreditation agency during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic", J Educ Eval Health Prof, 18, pp.2~ (2021)[DOI]
- Choi H, "The ASK 2019 in the accreditation of medical school", Med J Chosun Univ, 44, pp.1~7 (2024)
- Alenezi S, "Impact of external accreditation on students’ performance : Insights from a full accreditation cycle", Heliyon, 9, pp.e15815~ (2023)[DOI]
- Pillai KN, "A study of the post-accreditation scenario in the north eastern region of India : a meta-evaluation of the National Assessment and Accreditation Council processes and procedures", Qual High Educ, 12, pp.95~106 (2006)[DOI]
- Kim EM, "The study of developing the meta evaluation criteria for the Accreditation of Dental Education in Korea", J Korean Dent Assoc, 60, pp.143~152 (2022)[DOI]
- Cho OK, "The development of the meta-evaluation criteria for the Accreditation Evaluation System of Engineering Education in Korea", J Eng Educ Res, 16, pp.28~41 (2013)[DOI]
- Stufflebeam DL, "International Handbook of Educational Evaluation", pp.31~32 (2003), Springer
- Faul F, "G*Power 3 : a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences", Behav Res Methods, 39, pp.175~191 (2007)[DOI]
- Schafer T, "The meaningfulness of effect sizes in psychological research : differences between sub-disciplines and the impact of potential biases", Front Psychol, 10, pp.813~ (2019)[DOI]
- Yoo HH, "Change of accreditation standards of medical schools by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation from 2000 to 2019", J Educ Eval Health Prof, 17, pp.2~ (2020)[DOI]
- Al-Shareef AS, "Perception of the accreditation of the National Commission for Academic Accreditation and assessment at different health colleges in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia", Cureus, 15, pp.e43871~ (2023)[DOI]
- Jung H, "Is accreditation in medical education in Korea an opportunity or a burden", J Educ Eval Health Prof, 17, pp.31~ (2020)[DOI]
- Bigdeli S, "Exploring the challenges of educational accreditation of teaching hospitals and providing the solutions", J Educ Health Promot, 10, pp.144~ (2021)[DOI]
- Greenfield D, "Health sector accreditation research : a systematic review", Int J Qual Health Care, 20, pp.172~183 (2008)[DOI]
- Rink LC, "Stressors among healthcare workers : a summative content analysis", Glob Qual Nurs Res, 10 (2023)[DOI]