An international comparison of knowledge levels of medical students: The Maastricht Progress Test
An international comparison of knowledge levels of medical students: The Maastricht Progress Test
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2923.1996.tb00824.x
复制
发表时间：
1996-07-01
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
vanderVleuten, C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Albano, MG;Cavallo, F;vanderVleuten, C
医学生的国际流动性日益增加，激发了对国际评估格式的探索。作为一个步骤沿着这条线，动力学的知识获取和最终的认知水平的学生之间进行了比较，一个荷兰，一个德国和四个意大利医学系。为了进行比较，使用了马斯特里赫特进度测试（MPT）。在六个参与的学院中，有四个学院可以比较六年级学生的知识水平。这些数据显示，在整个测试中没有显著差异。另一方面，从各年级学生的横截面数据来看，知识获取的动力学表现出不同的趋势。在一所采用以问题为基础的学习的学校，学生获得知识几乎是线性的。在另一所学校，在最初的两年里，只获得了基础科学的知识，而没有获得临床或公共卫生/行为科学的知识。在同一时期的另外两所学校，学生似乎根本没有获得任何知识。在一些院系，注意到三年级或四年级学生的知识有了显著提高。这些调查结果可能是由各自课程的特点、学生在学习期间的选择以及国家或地方评估程序造成的。初步认为，欧洲医学教育中不同的教育方法和评价体系对毕业生最终知识水平的影响似乎是有限的。另一方面，这些差异可能会影响知识获取的动力学，特别是在基础或临床科学等不同领域。因此，MPT可能不适合解决个别国际交换学生的评估问题，但它可能有助于确定不同课程学生的相应认知水平，例如基础科学。
The increasing international mobility of medical students has inspired the search for an international assessment format. As one step along this line, kinetics of knowledge acquisition and final cognitive levels of students were compared among one Dutch, one German and four Italian medical faculties. For this comparison, the Maastricht Progress Test (MPT) was used. For four out of the six participating faculties, it was possible to compare the level of knowledge of sixth-year students. These data showed no significant differences on the test as a whole. On the other hand, as judged from cross-sectional data on students from all study years, the kinetics of knowledge acquisition showed different trends. In one school applying problem-based learning, acquisition of knowledge by students occurred almost linearly. In another school, over the first 2 years, acquisition of knowledge occurred only in the basic sciences but not in clinical or public health/behavioural sciences. In two other schools over that same period, students seemed to gain no knowledge at all. In some faculties, a marked boost in knowledge was noted with third- or fourth-year students. These findings may be explained by peculiarities of the respective curricula, selection of students during their studies, and national or local assessment procedures. It is preliminarily concluded that the different educational approaches and assessment systems in medical education in Europe seem to have only limited influence on the final level of knowledge of the graduates. On the other hand, these differences may influence the kinetics of knowledge acquisition, especially in distinct domains like basic or clinical sciences. Therefore, the MPT may not be suitabe to solve the problem of assessment of individual international exchange students, but it may be helpful in identifying corresponding cognitive levels on, for example, basic sciences for students in different curricula.