Cargando…

Evaluation of large-group lectures in medicine – development of the SETMED-L (Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures) questionnaire

BACKGROUND: The seven categories of the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP) represent a framework for planning and assessing medical teaching. Nevertheless, so far there is no specific evaluation tool for large-group lectures that is based on these categories. This paper reports the developm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Müller, Tjark, Montano, Diego, Poinstingl, Herbert, Dreiling, Katharina, Schiekirka-Schwake, Sarah, Anders, Sven, Raupach, Tobias, von Steinbüchel, Nicole
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5563045/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28821257
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-017-0970-8
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The seven categories of the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP) represent a framework for planning and assessing medical teaching. Nevertheless, so far there is no specific evaluation tool for large-group lectures that is based on these categories. This paper reports the development and psychometric validation of a short German evaluation tool for large-group lectures in medical education (SETMED-L: ‘Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures’) based on the SFDP-categories. METHODS: Data were collected at two German medical schools. In Study 1, a full information factor analysis of the new 14-item questionnaire was performed. In Study 2, following cognitive debriefings and adjustments, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed. The model was tested for invariance across medical schools and student gender. Convergent validity was assessed by comparison with results of the FEVOR questionnaire. RESULTS: Study 1 (n = 922) yielded a three-factor solution with one major (10 items) and two minor factors (2 items each). In Study 2 (n = 2740), this factor structure was confirmed. Scale reliability ranged between α = 0.71 and α = 0.88. Measurement invariance was given across student gender but not across medical schools. Convergent validity in the subsample tested (n = 246) yielded acceptable results. CONCLUSION: The SETMED-L showed satisfactory to very good psychometric characteristics. The main advantages are its short yet comprehensive form, the integration of SFDP-categories and its focus on medical education. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0970-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.