Abstract
ObjectivesThis study was aimed to describe lecturers’ perspective concerning the suitable Conscientiousness Index (CI) components and implementations, as well as to compare the CI scores in year 1–4 student batches. MethodsComponents were formulated from objective measurements based on interviews with 12 faculty members. The components include: attendance, adherence to rules, evaluative feedback submissions, performance in assignments and clinical skills, assignment submissions, volunteerism, accomplishments, and general misconducts. The scores were collected from year 1-4 pre-clinical medical students (N=144) during the first semester of 2014-2015. Final interviews were conducted with 9 faculty members. Quantitative analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test. Qualitative analysis was performed using content analysis. ResultsUsing Kruskal-Wallis test, significant difference was found in the CI scores among all years (p=0.000). Post-hoc analysis using Mann-Whitney test showed significant difference in all years except year 1 and 4 (p=0.388). Of the 9 lecturers interviewed during the second interviews, 7 endorsed the importance of CI, while 2 doubted its applicability. ConclusionsDue to the unique characteristics of each block, our system had not been able to conduct a balanced CI evaluation, as compared to the original research. We concluded that the implementation of CI would be highly dependent on the faculty members, with their commitment as the main pre-requisite. We hope to involve academic advisors as CI evaluators and improve our student-centered learning for future assessments. Further study is needed to investigate the longitudinal implementation of CI.
Highlights
Assessing medical students’ professionalism often raised both global and national discussions
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test showed an abnormal distribution across the Conscientiousness Index (CI) scores from year 1 – 4 pre-clinical medical students (p=0.005)
Kruskal-Wallis test showed a significant difference in CI scores between each year (p=0.000)
Summary
Assessing medical students’ professionalism often raised both global and national discussions. Academic medicine has described professionalism mostly in more of value-based manners,[5] which encompass attributes beyond the application of knowledge and skills: to embrace humanism, integrity, accountability, altruism, ability to work in a team, the pursuit for excellence, and many others. Difficulties in assessing professionalism may be attributed to the complex qualitative nature of professionalism. A powerful measurement for professionalism remains indeterminate.[6,7,8,9]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
