Task-specific checklists, holistic rubrics, and analytic rubrics are often used for performance assessments. We examined what factors evaluators consider important in holistic scoring of clinical performance assessment, and compared the usefulness of applying holistic and analytic rubrics respectively, and analytic rubrics in addition to task-specific checklists based on traditional standards. We compared the usefulness of a holistic rubric versus an analytic rubric in effectively measuring the clinical skill performances of 126 third-year medical students who participated in a clinical performance assessment conducted by Pusan National University School of Medicine. We conducted a questionnaire survey of 37 evaluators who used all three evaluation methods—holistic rubric, analytic rubric, and task-specific checklist—for each student. The relationship between the scores on the three evaluation methods was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation. Inter-rater agreement was analyzed by Kappa index. The effect of holistic and analytic rubric scores on the task-specific checklist score was analyzed using multiple regression analysis. Evaluators perceived accuracy and proficiency to be major factors in objective structured clinical examinations evaluation, and history taking and physical examination to be major factors in clinical performance examinations evaluation. Holistic rubric scores were highly related to the scores of the task-specific checklist and analytic rubric. Relatively low agreement was found in clinical performance examinations compared to objective structured clinical examinations. Meanwhile, the holistic and analytic rubric scores explained 59.1% of the task-specific checklist score in objective structured clinical examinations and 51.6% in clinical performance examinations. The results show the usefulness of holistic and analytic rubrics in clinical performance assessment, which can be used in conjunction with task-specific checklists for more efficient evaluation.

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to longitudinally examine the change in understanding of the self-reflection method, reflective thinking, and writing attitude and perception. Moreover, we investigated students’ educational needs and methods regarding self-reflection.Methods: The subjects were 117, who were in the pre-medical course in 2017 and were promoted to the medical course in 2019. Questions concerning students’ understanding of self-reflection methods, their attitude and perception of reflective writing, and educational needs and methods regarding self-reflection were self-developed. For students’ reflective thinking level in writing, we used the approach developed by Galvez-Martin, Bowman, and Morrison and adapted by Kwon. For dada analysis, χ²test, t-test, frequency analysis was used.Results: We found that students’ level of understanding regarding self-reflection methods increases slightly, but not significant (χ²= 2.238, p>0.05). There was no significant change in the level of reflective thinking in writing (χ²= 8.003, p>0.05). The students’ attitude toward reflective writing decreased in the medical course than in the pre-medical course (t = 3.475, p<0.001). The perception that reflective writing was helpful for individual improvement decreased during the medical course (t = 4.931, p<0.001). The need for self-reflection education increased in the medical course (t = -2.659, p<0.001). They preferred implementation in the first year of the medical course as an instructor-led special lecture.Conclusion: Self-reflective ability is not naturally developed as students’ progress through grade levels. Educational intervention is needed to help students understand approaches to self-reflection and its importance in enabling them to develop their abilities as well as to participate actively in reflective writing.

This study will compare differences in perception of interprofessional education (IPE) in the faculty of medicine, nursing, and pharmacy. It will also analyze differences in the level of importance of IPE competences and the present competence levels of their students perceived by the faculty. The study included 115 participants from the faculty of medicine, 31 from nursing, and 23 from pharmacy. The surveys contained 21 questions on their perceptions of IPE, and perception on the nine competences of IPE. The results were analyzed using analysis of variance and χ2 analysis, and the Borich coefficient was calculated to identify the educational order of priority from the competence levels of their student of IPE. Participants of 14.8% responded that they were aware of IPE, 95.8% responded that they did not have experience in IPE, and 95.8% responded that IPE was necessary. Among the subfactors of perception of IPE, the faculty of medicine had significantly lower perceptions of the importance, effectiveness, and support of IPE (p<0.001). The present competence levels of their students were significantly lower (p<0.001) than the level of importance of IPE competences perceived by the faculty, and its perception was at its lowest in the faculty of medicine. The needs assessment of the IPE program was in the order of communication skills (10.210), conflict-solving skills (10.114), problem-solving skills (9.319), empathy skills (9.110), and collaborative leadership (8.624) among the nine competences. This study will contribute to providing basic data needed to develop faculty development programs on IPE and IPE programs for their students.

This study was conducted to compare the specialty preference and factors that affect choices of medical specialties between medical college students and graduate medical school students. A self-administered questionnaire was conducted in 563 medical students, and 482 (graduates: 199, undergraduates: 283) responded (response rate, 85.61%). The students completed a brief survey, which included 39 items that sampled their demographic data, career choice, and factors that influenced their choice. Most students in medical college and graduate medical school preferred clinical medicine. Graduate medical school students preferred internal medicine, pediatrics, and family medicine. In contrast, medical college students preferred neurology, family medicine, and psychiatry. Important factors that affected the selection of specialties were seniors' advice, advice of other students, clerkship experiences, and specialty experiences. This result shows that there are differences in the factors that affect the selection of medical specialties between medical college students and graduate medical school students. But, the opportunity to explore future careers and to consult their choice of specialty, in accordance with the needs and characteristics of individual students, must be provided for all medical students.

Purpose: This study aims to verify whether the Reflective Practice Questionnaire (RPQ) developed by Priddis and Rogers is valid in the Korean context to identify the level of reflection of medical students in clinical practice.Methods: A total of 202 third- and fourth-year medical students from seven universities participated in the study. After receiving approval for use from the authors, a survey was conducted on the students through an adaptation process. The original scale consists of 10 factors with 40 items. The Self-efficacy in Clinical Performance Scale (SECP), Korean Self-reflection and Insight Scale (K-SRIS), and Reflection-in-Learning Scale (RinLS) were used to validate the scale. Exploratory factor, confirmatory factor, correlation, and reliability analyses were used for data analysis.Results: As a result of exploratory factor analysis, 10 subfactors were extracted (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin=0.856, Bartlett’s test: χ 2 =5,044.337, degrees of freedom=780, p<0.001). Among the 40 items, one that showed a high overlapping load for other factors was excluded. As a result of confirmatory factor analysis, the 10-factor structure model was found suitable (χ 2 =1.980, comparative fit index=0.859, Tucker-Lewis index=0.841, root mean square error of approximation=0.070). As a result of the criterion validity test, most of the subfactors of the Korean version of the RPQ (K-RPQ) showed a positive correlation with K-SRIS, RinLS, and SECP. The reliability of 10 subfactors was satisfactory, ranging from 0.666 to 0.919.Conclusion: The K-RPQ was confirmed to be a reliable and valid tool to evaluate the level of reflection among Korean medical students in clinical clerkship. This scale can be used as a tool to provide feedback on each student’s level of reflection in clinical clerkship.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of curriculum revision on student performance in tests of the medical knowledge of students at Pusan National University. Test scores of the Basic Medicine Comprehensive Examination (BMCE), conducted by the Medical Education Assessment Corporation, and internal clinical knowledge tests of the three integrated courses of the Pusan National University School of Medicine, during the last 3 years (2015-2017) were compared with an unpaired Student t-test and the results were considered to be significant at p<0.05. Curriculum revision in 2017 introduced the integration of basic and clinical courses at the organ level of medical education. Scores of BMCE and internal clinical knowledge tests in three integrated courses after curriculum revision showed a statistically significant increase after curriculum revision. Curriculum revisions that integrated the basic and clinical courses in organ-level education improved student's academic performance significantly.