임상실습 수업평가를 위한 평가도구 개발 및 검증
Developing and Testing an Evaluation Tool to Measure Clinical Teaching
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: Teaching evaluation tools can be used to provide feedback to medical educators and help them improve their teaching skills. The purpose of this study was to develop a clinical teaching evaluation tool and test its efficacy. Methods: The draft tool was developed based on clinical education literature and was modified by the stakeholder groups. To examine the quality of the instrument, content and construct validity, as well as reliability and fitness were analyzed. Content validity was tested by the stakeholder groups using a survey, and construct validity was verified by confirmatory factor analysis using LISREL 8.8. Internal consistency of items was assessed thorough Cronbach α estimation. Rasch analysis using Winstep 3.65 was performed to estimate the fitness of the tool. Results: The resulting tool consisted of 4 large categories, 25 small categories, and 43 items. According to the test results, the average importance of all 43 items was 4.03 (3.63 to 4.29). Cronbach α was 0.9689, and the correlation coefficients between the items were high. With regard to construct validity, 10 items needed minor modifications in the category setting. As the infit (0.76to 1.23) and outfit (0.75 to 1.40) indices show, 42 items were fit to the item response theory. Conclusion: The clinical teaching evaluation tool that has been developed in this study is valid and reliable and fits the item response theory. It can be used as an evaluation method in a variety of clinical teaching settings.
Abstract
Purpose: Teaching evaluation tools can be used to provide feedback to medical educators and help them improve their teaching skills. The purpose of this study was to develop a clinical teaching evaluation tool and test its efficacy. Methods: The draft tool was developed based on clinical education literature and was modified by the stakeholder groups. To examine the quality of the instrument, content and construct validity, as well as reliability and fitness were analyzed. Content validity was tested by the stakeholder groups using a survey, and construct validity was verified by confirmatory factor analysis using LISREL 8.8. Internal consistency of items was assessed thorough Cronbach α estimation. Rasch analysis using Winstep 3.65 was performed to estimate the fitness of the tool. Results: The resulting tool consisted of 4 large categories, 25 small categories, and 43 items. According to the test results, the average importance of all 43 items was 4.03 (3.63 to 4.29). Cronbach α was 0.9689, and the correlation coefficients between the items were high. With regard to construct validity, 10 items needed minor modifications in the category setting. As the infit (0.76to 1.23) and outfit (0.75 to 1.40) indices show, 42 items were fit to the item response theory. Conclusion: The clinical teaching evaluation tool that has been developed in this study is valid and reliable and fits the item response theory. It can be used as an evaluation method in a variety of clinical teaching settings.
참고문헌 (20)
- Yoo TW, "A student's evaluation of educational behavior of clinical preceptors in a teaching hospital", Korean J Med Educ, 3, pp.57~65 (1991)
- Yu SH, "The contents and level of clinical education in medical schools", Korean J Med Educ, 4, pp.55~68 (1992)
- Kim YI, "Development of an evaluation baseline module for clinical clerkship: Gachon Medical School experience", Korean J Med Educ, 15, pp.131~141 (2003)
- 박주현, "일개 의과대학 임상실습 교육과정 평가", 한국의학교육, 16(2), pp.157~168 (2004), 한국의학교육학회
- Ohrr H, "The study on the faculty evaluation system of teaching ability in Korea", Korean J Med Educ, 11, pp.297~312 (1999)
- Hwang K, "Clinical performance assessment as a model of Korean medical licensure examination", Korean J Med Educ, 13, pp.277~287 (2001)
- 양은배, "의과대학 임상실습 교육 및 평가 현황 분석", 한국의학교육, 19(2), pp.111~121 (2007), 한국의학교육학회
- Graffam B, "Using observations of clinicians' teaching practices to build a model of clinical instruction", Acad Med, 83, pp.768~774 (2008)
- Stronge JH, "Evaluating teaching: a guide to current thinking and best practice", pp.21~38 (1997), Corwin Press
- Won HH, "Understanding and application of teaching evaluation", pp.8~132 (2002), Gyoyook Gwahaksa
- Kwak YS, "Teacher evaluation, teaching evaluation", pp.20~338 (2005), Wonmisa
- Chandran L, "Evaluating the performance of medical educators: a novel analysis tool to demonstrate the quality and impact of educational activities", Acad Med, 84, pp.58~66 (2009)
- 채수진, "국내 의과대학 강좌평가제 운영 실태 분석", 한국의학교육, 19(2), pp.133~142 (2007), 한국의학교육학회
- Skeff KM, "Improving clinical teaching: evaluation of a national dissemination program", Arch Intern Med, 152, pp.1156~1161 (1992)
- Copeland HL, "Developing and testing an instrument to measure the effectiveness of clinical teaching in an academic medical center", Acad Med, 75, pp.161~166 (2000)
- Litzelman DK, "Factorial validation of a widely disseminated educational framework for evaluating clinical teachers", Acad Med, 73, pp.688~695 (1998)
- Sutkin G, "makes a good clinical teacher in medicine? A review of the literature", Acad Med, 83, pp.452~466 (2008)
- 임은정, "의학교육에서 수업의 전문성 향상을 위한 ‘좋은 수업’의 요건 탐색", 한국의학교육, 22(2), pp.101~111 (2010), 한국의학교육학회
- McLeod PJ, "Seven principles for teaching procedural and technical skills", Acad Med, 76, pp.1080~ (2001)
- Junger J, "Effects of basic clinical skills training on objective structured clinical examination performance", Med Educ, 39, pp.1015~1020 (2005)