DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Qualitative Study on Steering of Education Accreditation: With Case Study on Korean Medicine Education

학문분야별 평가인증제 운영에 관한 질적 사례 연구: 한의학을 중심으로

  • Received : 2019.07.17
  • Accepted : 2019.08.06
  • Published : 2019.09.01

Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to develop steering of program accreditation system in Korean Medicine Education through meta-evaluation. For this study, the subjects of our research were categorized as the accreditation criteria and system, results and effects, tasks for improvement on Korean Medicine Education. Methods: We conducted Focus Group Interview on 102 full-time professors with experience of participating on accreditation of Korean Medicine Education from 12 college of Korean Medicine Education and we analyzed it by thematic analysis. Results: The accreditation criteria and program evaluation system of Korean Medicine were listed as 'Confusion about the goals of program evaluation', 'High hurdles on accreditation', 'obsession to success cases', 'Small college complaints about applying the same criteria', 'Dilemma of quantitative and qualitative evaluation'. The results and effects of program evaluation in Korean Medicine Education were listed as 'Establishment of base infrastructure for basic medical education', 'Benchmarking and exchanging opinions through evaluation certification', 'Resistance to documents and document-based evaluation', and 'Double-sided of evaluation certification'. As for the tasks for further improvement, the following list is suggested. 'Actively promote evaluation certification', 'Simplification and standardization of forms', 'Requesting for activating about Evaluation committee', 'Need for consulting before regular evaluation'. Conclusion: It is necessary to upgrade the accreditation system and make efforts to improve the issues discovered for better Korean Medicine Education.

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국한의학교육평가원

References

  1. Anderson S B, Ball S, Murphy R T. Encyclopedia of Educational Evaluation: Concept and Techniques for Evaluating Education and training Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 1975.
  2. Choi GJ. The Study of the Academic Discipline Evaluation Systems among the independent non-governmental organizations. The Journal of Politics of Education. 2011;18(1): 111-141.
  3. Institute of Korean Medicine Education and Evaluation. The guide of Korean Medicine Program Evaluation for University(2nd). 2018.
  4. Sim SB, Kwon JH, Kim HW, Hong JW, Shin SW. Student Satisfaction Study of Clinical Skills Training in Korean Medical Education. Journal of Korean Medicine. 2013; 34(3):37-53. https://doi.org/10.13048/jkm.13011
  5. Kwon SW, Shin SW, Lim BM. A Survey of Students' Satisfaction with Education in Traditional Korean Medicine. Journal of Korean Medicine. 2012; 33: 1-11.
  6. Cha HY, Kim NH, Hong JW, Shin SW. Evaluation of the Implementation of Problem-Based Learning in Korean Medical Education. 2012; 26(3): 351-359.
  7. Cho CS. Student Satisfaction Study and Interrater Comparative Study on Patient-Physician Interaction Score of Clinical Performance Examination in Korean Medical Education. Korean Journal of Oriental Physiology & Pathology. 2015; 29(2): 152-159. https://doi.org/10.15188/kjopp.2015.04.29.2.152
  8. Cho HW, Hwang EH, Shin BC, Sul JU, Hong JW, Shin SW et al. The Analysis of Satisfaction with Clinical Training and the Related Factors - Especially in Oriental Rehabilitation Medicine. The Journal of Oriental Medical Preventive. 2012; 16(2): 1-15
  9. Kwak JS. A Qualitative Study on Introduction and Steering of Education Accreditation: With Case Studies on Engineering Education Accreditation and Business Education Accreditation. Journal of Educational Evaluation. 2011; 24(3):567-593.
  10. Yoon TR. Qualitative Research for Culture and History. Seoul, Arche. 2004.
  11. Morgan, D L. Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage publications. 1996; 16.
  12. Merriam, S B. Qualitative case study research. Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. 2009; 39-54.
  13. Aronson, J. A pragmatic view of thematic analysis. The qualitative report 1995; 2(1): 1-3.
  14. Kwon KW. Handbook for Evaluation of University. Seoul: Seongwonsa.
  15. World Federation of Medical Education. Basic Medical Education WFME Global Standards For Quality Improvement (The 2015 Revision). 2015.
  16. Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation. ASK 2019. http://www.kimee.or.kr/medical-education/criteria/
  17. Ratcliff, J L. Dynamic and Communicative Aspects of Quality Assurance. Quality in Higher Education. 2003; 9(2): 117-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320308155
  18. OECD/The World Bank. Cross-Border tertiary education: A way towards capacity development. 2007.
  19. Filippakou, O, Tapper, T. (2008). Quality Assurance and Quality Enhancement in Higher Education: Contested Territories? Higher Education Quarterly. 2008; 62(1): 84-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00379.x
  20. Kwak JS. A Research on the University Education Accreditation Based on Principles of Education. Journal of Educational Principles. 2012; 17(1): 1-33.
  21. Oh SS. Kang IS, Mang KH, Hong US. (2005). A Study on the Selection of the Professional Evaluation Institution in the Academic Field. Ministry of Education. 2005.