首页> 外文期刊>Medical teacher >Counting quality because quality counts: differing standards in master's in medical education programmes.
【24h】

Counting quality because quality counts: differing standards in master's in medical education programmes.

机译:以质量为重,以质量为重:医学教育计划中硕士课程的标准不同。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom the medical teacher role is being formalized. One result is that Masters level programmes in medical education are proliferating; however little or no attempt has been made to capture any differences in quality offered by them. A small scale project (Allery et al. 2006) set out to rectify this omission. AIM: Drawing on data from that study, this paper considers the variation in standards across programmes. Specifically research methods training provided in MMEd courses and levels of support for researchers is investigated. METHOD: A secondary analysis of the data generated by the evaluative study and gathered via review of programme web sites, semi structured interviews with MSc course directors and case studies in two sites, identified from purposive sampling. RESULTS: Variations in both taught and research elements were identified. The quality of the research experience was compromised for some students many of whom were poorly prepared to undertake educational research and the question of standards raised in respect of those institutions where the examination process lacked real academic rigour. CONCLUSIONS: The variance in research methods training and support raises a number of issues in relation to quality standards. The medical education community needs to engage in open and critical dialogue around the whole constellation of paradigms, methods and activities that pertain in educational research. Unless or until we address these deeper concerns, research into medical education will suffer through a lack of design flair, implementation and rigour.
机译:背景:在英国,医学教师的角色正在正规化。结果是医学教育的硕士课程正在激增。但是很少或没有尝试捕获它们提供的质量差异。一个小型项目(Allery等人,2006年)着手纠正这一遗漏。目的:利用这项研究的数据,本文考虑了各个计划的标准差异。专门研究MMEd课程中提供的研究方法培训以及对研究人员的支持水平。方法:对评估研究生成的数据进行二次分析,这些数据是通过对计划网站的审查,对理学硕士课程负责人的半结构化访谈以及在两个地点进行的案例研究而收集的,这些数据是从有意抽样中确定的。结果:确定了教学和研究元素的变化。对于一些学生来说,研究经验的质量受到了损害,其中许多人准备接受教育研究的准备不足,并且对考试过程缺乏真正学术严谨性的那些机构提出了标准问题。结论:研究方法培训和支持的差异引起了许多与质量标准有关的问题。医学教育界需要围绕与教育研究有关的整个范式,方法和活动,进行公开和批判性的对话。除非或直到我们解决这些更深层次的问题,否则医学教育的研究将因缺乏设计才能,实施和严谨性而受到影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号