According to the World Health Organization, for medical schools to fulfill their obligation of social accountability, it is necessary for medical education, research, and service areas to ref lect the healthcare system’s relevance, quality, cost-effectiveness, and equity. This study utilized Boelen and Heck’s (1995) social accountability grid model to analyze the degree to which the Accreditation Standards of Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation 2019 (ASK2019) standards apply the World Federation for Medical Education’s (WFME) standards. The social accountability characteristics of the former were compared to those of the WFME, the Liaison Committee on Medical Education, and the Australian Medical Council. Experts with experience and certification in medical education and evaluation classified the ASK2019 standards according to the grid model, evaluated social accountability perspectives, and categorized them according to the process, content, and outcome. Of the 92 standards, 61 (66.30%) were selected as social accountability standards; these encompassed all areas. There was a particular focus on outcome-related areas, such as “mission and outcomes,” “student assessment,” “educational evaluation,” and “continuous improvement.” Education and quality were the most common (33, 54.11%), followed by 18 standards related to education and relevance. However, the standards on cost effectiveness and equity corresponding to education, research, and service were significantly insufficient. As a result of classification using a logic model, many criteria were incorporated into the process, producing results similar to those of international accreditation institutions. Therefore, to fulfill medical schools’ social accountability, it is necessary to develop cost effectiveness and equity standards with reference to grid models and expand them beyond education to include research and service areas. Developing content and outcome standards is also required.
Read full abstract