A feasibility study on teaching evaluation system in medical education

The purpose of this study is to develop an evaluation instrument with high feasibility and acceptability, and to quantify the outcome of evaluation, in order to set up an efficient evaluation system. Teaching evaluation with questionnaire by students has been carried out in National Yang-Ming Medical College for two years. With the support of both teachers and students, the system has been established and conducted on a regular basis. The most important purpose of evaluation is to improve the quality of teaching. During the two academic years (Sep. 1986-June 1988) of the program, the overall response rate was 44.5%, the Department of Nursing had the highest response rate, followed by Dentistry, Medicine-Post Graduate, Medical Technology, and Medicine. Taking into consideration of the year and the class size, the regression analysis found that higher year or smaller size of the class had better response rate. The response rates dropped significantly after the first academic year regardless of department or year. A total of 23 classes were included in the evaluation program and 99 courses were evaluated. All questions in the questionnaire used a 0 to 4 ordinal scale, in which 0 (improvement needed) was the low end and 4 (excellent) the high end. The mean score of the seven questions of teaching evaluation was 2.47. As a whole, the students were satisfied with the teaching. As to the categories of courses, clinical courses had better mean score than basic medical courses, and basic medical courses had better mean score than common required courses. To evaluate the effectiveness of the teaching, students' achievement was used as the outcome variable. The most important predictive variable was the method of instruction, followed by the content of lecture such as degree of difficulty of the lecture and cognitiveness of the contents. The above 3 variables explained 76% of the variation of the students' achievement. However, the significant of teachers' speech, performance and attitude were not so influential. Analysis based on the characteristics of the teachers (sex, age, position, and teaching experience), the characteristics of students (department and year), teaching environments (time and place), and the 3 categories of courses (clinical, basic medical and common required courses) showed that all the above variables only explained less then 10% of the variation of the students' achievement.