Evaluation of self-directed clinical education: validation of an instrument.
AIM: To explore the evaluation of self-directed, integrated clinical education. METHODS: We delivered a quantitative and qualitative, self-report questionnaire to students through their web-based learning management system. The questionnaire was distributed 4 times over 1 year, each time in 2 parts....
| Publicado en: | Medical Education Vol. 38; no. 6; pp. 670 - 679 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jun2004
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106635241&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106635241 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 03080110 ESF jtl: Medical Education issn: 03080110 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jun2004 vid: 38 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell place: Malden, Massachusetts artinfo: ui: 106635241 2005082370 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01837.x NLM15189264 106635241 ppf: 670 ppct: 9 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Evaluation of self-directed clinical education: validation of an instrument. aug: au: Dornan T Boshuizen H Cordingley L Hider S Hadfield J Scherpbier A affil: Hope Hospital, University of Manchester School of Medicine, Manchester, UK; tim.dornan@man.ac.uk sug: subj: Course Evaluation Education, Medical Evaluation Instrument Validation Learning Methods Evaluation Analysis of Variance Bivariate Statistics Confidence Intervals Construct Validity Content Validity Criterion-Related Validity Data Analysis Software Data Analysis, Statistical Descriptive Statistics Factor Analysis Funding Source Multimethod Studies P-Value Self Report Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient Summated Rating Scaling United Kingdom Validation Studies Human ab: AIM: To explore the evaluation of self-directed, integrated clinical education. METHODS: We delivered a quantitative and qualitative, self-report questionnaire to students through their web-based learning management system. The questionnaire was distributed 4 times over 1 year, each time in 2 parts. A generic part evaluated boundary conditions for learning, teaching activities and 'real patient learning'. Factor analysis with varimax rotation was used to validate the constructs that made up the scale and to stimulate hypotheses about how they interrelated. A module-specific part evaluated real patient learning of the subject matter in the curriculum. RESULTS: A total of 101 students gave 380 of a possible 404 responses (94%). The generic data loaded onto 4 factors, corresponding to: firm quality; hospital-based teaching and learning; community and out-patient learning, and problem-based learning (PBL). A 5-item quality index had content, construct and criterion validity. Quality differed greatly between firms. Self-evaluation of module-specific, real patient learning was also valid. It was strongly influenced by the specialty interests of hospital firms. CONCLUSIONS: Quality is a multidimensional construct. Self-report evaluation of real patient learning is feasible, and could be capitalised on to promote reflective self-direction. The social and material context of learning is an important dimension of educational quality. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|