Faculty’s perspective on skill assessment in undergraduate medical education: Qualitative online forum study
نویسندگان
1 Department of Community Medicine, SSR Medical College, Belle Rive, Mauritius
2 Department of Anatomy, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab
3 Department of Pharmacology, Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
4
5 Department of Community Medicine, Rohilkhand Medical College and Hospital, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh
6 Department of Medicine, Peoples College of Medical Sciences and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
doi
چکیده
BACKGROUND: India is at the nascent stage of competency‑based medical education. Facultiestrained in medical education are the main driving force for change. The present study exploresthe perception of faculties about the current practices and problems in medical/dental/nursingundergraduate assessment, barriers to adoption of best practices, and solutions for addressing them.METHODOLOGY: A qualitative study was designed and data collected through an asynchronousonline discussion forum. A group of 31 health professionals (FAIMER fellows selected on the basisof active participation in department of medical education of respective colleges) participated in theforum. An open‑ended topic guide with prompts was designed. The forum was initiated by releaseof discussion topics (threads) at the start of the month and remained in forum throughout the month.Researchers moderated and recorded day‑to‑day events. All online forum data were coded line byline and analyzed using conventional content analysis.RESULTS: Four categories generated were: (1) Low utility of current skill assessment system dueto low validity and reliability; (2) Barrier in adopting newer assessment tool due to the absence offelt need of faculties and students, mistaken beliefs, and limited resources; (3) Poor implementationof newer assessment tools such as formatives and objective structured clinical examination withno blueprinting; and (4) Solutions proposed were regular formative assessment, criterion‑basedexamination, quality‑assured faculty development programs, and administrative support.CONCLUSIONS: Barriers in adopting newer assessment tools are related to the faculty’s perceptionand resource constraint. This can be addressed by quality‑assured faculty development programsand effective implementation of competency‑based education.
