Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions

Yoo Sang Yoon

2 Articles

Changes in the accreditation standards of medical schools by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation from 2000 to 2019: Hyo Hyun Yoo, Mi Kyung Kim, Yoo Sang Yoon, Keun Mi Lee, Jong Hun Lee, Seung-Jae Hong, Jung –Sik Huh, Won Kyun Park; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2020;17:2. Published online April 7, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2020.17.2

7,842 View
209 Download
8 Web of Science
11 Crossref

This review presents information on changes in the accreditation standards of medical schools in Korea by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation (KIMEE) from 2000 to 2019. Specifically, the following aspects are explained: the development process, setting principles and directions, evaluation items, characteristics of the standards, and validity testing over the course of 4 cycles. The first cycle of accreditation (2000–2005) focused on ensuring the minimum requirements for the educational environment. The evaluation criteria emphasized the core elements of medical education, including facilities and human resources. The second cycle of accreditation (2007–2010) emphasized universities’ commitment to social accountability and the pursuit of excellence in medical education. It raised the importance of qualitative standards for judging the content and quality of education. In the post-second accreditation cycle (2012–2018) which means third accreditation cycle, accreditation criteria were developed to standardize the educational environment and programs and to be used for curriculum development in order to continually improve the quality of basic medical education. Most recently, the ASK 2019 (Accreditation Standards of KIMEE 2019) accreditation cycle focused on qualitative evaluations in accordance with the World Federation of Medical Education’s accreditation criteria to reach the international level of basic medical education, which emphasizes the need for a student-centered curriculum, communication with society, and evaluation through a comprehensive basic medical education course. The KIMEE has developed a basic medical education evaluation and accreditation system in a step-by-step manner, as outlined above. Understanding previous processes will be helpful for the future development of accreditation criteria for medical schools in Korea.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

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
Yoonjung Lee, Min-jung Lee, Junmoo Ahn, Chungwon Ha, Ye Ji Kang, Cheol Woong Jung, Dong-Mi Yoo, Jihye Yu, Seung-Hee Lee
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2024; 21: 8. CrossRef
Quality and constructed knowledge: Truth, paradigms, and the state of the science
Janet Grant, Leonard Grant
Medical Education.2023; 57(1): 23. CrossRef
Current perception of social accountability of medical schools in Japan: A qualitative content analysis
Hiroko Mori, Masashi Izumiya, Mikio Hayashi, Masato Eto
Medical Teacher.2023; 45(5): 524. CrossRef
Accreditation standards items of post-2nd cycle related to the decision of accreditation of medical schools by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation
Kwi Hwa Park, Geon Ho Lee, Su Jin Chae, Seong Yong Kim
Korean Journal of Medical Education.2023; 35(1): 1. CrossRef
Impact of external accreditation on students’ performance: Insights from a full accreditation cycle
Shuliweeh Alenezi, Ayman Al-Eadhy, Rana Barasain, Trad S. AlWakeel, Abdullah AlEidan, Hadeel N. Abohumid
Heliyon.2023; 9(5): e15815. CrossRef
Is West Really Best? The Discourse of Modernisation in Global Medical School Regulation Policy
Mohammed Ahmed Rashid, Ann Griffin
Teaching and Learning in Medicine.2023; : 1. CrossRef
Analysis of the degree of social accountability in accreditation standards for basic medical education
Sangmi T Lee, Eunbae B. Yang
Korean Medical Education Review.2023; 25(3): 273. CrossRef
Quality improvement in allied healthcare: Key recommendations for educational institutions
Jithin Kalathikudiyil Sreedharan, Saad Mohammed AlRabeeah, Arun Vijay Subbarayalu, Edan M. AlZahrani, Jaber Saud AlQahtani, Mohammed Dafer AlAhmari, Abdullah Saeed AlQahtani, Musallam AlNasser, Amal AlSomali, Asma Falah AlHarbi, Yaser AlNaam, Ibrahim A. A
Informatics in Medicine Unlocked.2023; 43: 101412. CrossRef
Development of consensus-based aims, contents, intended learning outcomes, teaching, and evaluation methods for a history of medicine and pharmacy course for medical and pharmacy students in the Arab world: a Delphi study
Ramzi Shawahna
BMC Medical Education.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
The impact of external academic accreditation of undergraduate medical program on students’ satisfaction
Ayman Al-Eyadhy, Shuliweeh Alenezi
BMC Medical Education.2021;[Epub] CrossRef
Why social accountability of medical schools in Sudan can lead to better primary healthcare and excellence in medical education?
MohamedH Ahmed, MohamedElhassan Abdalla, MohamedH Taha
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care.2020; 9(8): 3820. CrossRef

Clinical performance of medical students in Korea in a whole-task emergency station in the objective structured clinical examination with a standardized patient complaining of palpitations: Song Yi Park, Hyun-Hee Kong, Min-Jeong Kim, Yoo Sang Yoon, Sang-Hwa Lee, Sunju Im, Ji-Hyun Seo; J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2020;17:42. Published online December 16, 2020; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2020.17.42

5,220 View
135 Download
2 Web of Science
2 Crossref

Abstract PDF Supplementary Material

This study assessed the clinical performance of 150 third-year medicalstudents in Busan, Korea in a whole-task emergency objective structured clinical examination station that simulated a patient with palpitations visiting the emergency department. The examination was conducted from November 25 to 27, 2019. Clinical performance was assessed as the number and percentage of students who performed history-taking (HT), a physical examination (PE), an electrocardiography (ECG) study, patient education (Ed), and clinical reasoning (CR), which were items on the checklist. It was found that 18.0% of students checked the patient’s pulse, 51.3% completed an ECG study, and 57.9% explained the results to the patient. A sizable proportion (38.0%) of students did not even attempt an ECG study. In a whole-task emergency station, students showed good performance on HT and CR, but unsatisfactory results for PE, ECG study, and Ed. Clinical skills educational programs for subjected student should focus more on PE, timely diagnostic tests, and sufficient Ed.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Newly appointed medical faculty members’ self-evaluation of their educational roles at the Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine in 2020 and 2021: a cross-sectional survey-based study
Sun Kim, A Ra Cho, Chul Woon Chung
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 28. CrossRef
Comparing the cut score for the borderline group method and borderline regression method with norm-referenced standard setting in an objective structured clinical examination in medical school in Korea
Song Yi Park, Sang-Hwa Lee, Min-Jeong Kim, Ki-Hwan Ji, Ji Ho Ryu
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2021; 18: 25. CrossRef

Author index