콘텐츠 바로가기
로그인
컨텐츠

Category Open

Resources

tutorial

Collection of research papers and materials on development issues

home

Resources
Social Development Health
Social Development Education

Print

일개 의학전문대학원 교육과정 평가 결과 분석 (Analytical case study of evaluation of curriculum at a medical school)

Related Document
Frame of Image
  • 일개 의학전문대학원 교육과정 평가 결과 분석 (Analytical case study of evaluation of curriculum at a medical school)
  • An, Jung Hee; Han, Jae Jin; Kim, Na jin; Eo, Eunkyung; Kwon, Ivo; Lee, Soon Nam안정희; 한재진; 김나진; 어은경; 권복규; 이순남
  • 한국의학교육학회


link
Title 일개 의학전문대학원 교육과정 평가 결과 분석 (Analytical case study of evaluation of curriculum at a medical school)
Similar Titles
Material Type Articles
Author(English)

An, Jung Hee; Han, Jae Jin; Kim, Na jin; Eo, Eunkyung; Kwon, Ivo; Lee, Soon Nam

Author(Korean)

안정희; 한재진; 김나진; 어은경; 권복규; 이순남

Publisher

[Seoul, Korea]:한국의학교육학회

Date 2010-03
Journal Title; Vol./Issue 한국의학교육학회지:vol. 22(no. 1)
Pages 8
Subject Country South Korea(Asia and Pacific)
Language Korean
File Type Link
Subject Social Development < Health
Social Development < Education
Holding 한국의학교육학회

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims at to make intermediate-term evaluations of a curriculum by investigating its development, operation and outcomes 2 years after its revision. Methods: A survey using 5-point-Lickert scale questionnaires was given to the group of directors who developed the curriculum, instructors who only used it in their classes, and a student group from the first and second grades. Focus group interviews were performed in the professor groups. Results: Curricular reform was evaluated as being systematic, democratic, and positive in general. Both groups answered questions positively about the relevance of the integrated curriculum and introduction of clinical medicine (ICM), graded as 3.4 (professor) and 3.5 (student). As for problem-based learning (PBL) and the patient-doctor-society (PDS), the professor group responded more positively than students. The 'web-based learning center' was recognized positively by many more students (4.01) than professors (2.75). (The rest omitted)