中山医学大学医学院如何推动问题导向学习

自1990年起,中山医学大学医学院根据办学的宗旨、世界医学教育改革的潮流及自身条件,选定推动问题导向学习(Problem-based learning;PBL-)、基础及临床课程整合(Integration of basic and clinical sciences)及成立教师成长中心(Center for Faculty Development;CFD)为本校教改之主轴。有关推动问题导向学习部分,历经(1)探索期(1994～2000):包括观察及学习国内外医学院校引入PBL的过程与经验。本期关键因素包括政府教改政策与评鉴指标,他校实施成果和本校改革决心与条件。(2)准备期(2000-2002):包括促成师生共识,小组老师之训练,教案之撰写与审查,课程整并与学生小组化安排。本期关键因素为教师间共识与其权益维护,课程整合及学习相关配合措施,并为医学预备科学生安排PBL先导课程(学习法与循证医学)。(3)实施期(2000～2004):包括选择高年级临床医学课程率先实施,学生与小组老师分组,实施时段与空间安排以及课程评价。本期关键因素在于实施小组学习的配套措施是否适当。(4)扩展期(2004-2006):将PBL自临床课程延伸至基础医学课程及医学人文课程。此期关键在于基础医学与人文课程老师的共识、教师训练与奖励措施,基础医学课程的整并及PBL计划的评价与改进。(5)精进期(2006～):预计建构PBL网络学习资源与规划在线实施PBL,并完成发展医学教育的器官化模块课程及其配套的PBL和临床技能训练。本校推动PBL的经验,认为PBL,是医学教育中良好的学习模式之一,可行性高且受到学生欢迎,但路途需步步为营,采取渐进改革,并争取老师与同学的认同是实施的关键。

Adoption of PBL in Medical Education: Experience at Chung Shan Medical University

The main approaches to medical education reform that have been introduced elsewhere in the world, including the integration of basic and clinical sciences into organ-based model, the establishment of a Center for Faculty Development and problem-based learning (PBL) have been introduced to the College of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University (CSMU) since the mid 1990s. The process of developing the PBL approach can be divided into the following stages: Observation (1994-2000): In this stage, CSMU observed the practice and effectiveness of PBL programs in other domestic and foreign medical schools. At the same time, we assessed the possibility of introducing PBL to Chung Shan. When the authority decided to introduce PBL, a PBL committee was inaugurated. Preparation (2000-2002): In this stage, tutor training took place, as well as PBL case writing workshops to reach consensus among the faculty. To reduce the total amount of curricula and traditional teaching hours, we combined and simplified related curricula, so that one and half weekdays were reserved for PBL tutorials and students' self-study. A preliminary course about how to learn well, including the philosophy and methodology of learning as well as evidence-based medicine (EBM), was integrated into premedical curricula. Practice (2002-2004): In light of the number of trained tutors and written cases that have been prepared, and the desire that the PBL would be successful from the start, CSMU chose to introduce PBL to the clinical curricula first in a hybrid curriculum design. This meant that the traditional teaching was retained at the beginning. Evaluation of PBL by the students was done at the end of each semester. Tutor meetings were held twice per semester. Advancement (2004-2006): In this stage, PBL was introduced to the basic medical curricula as well as to the premedical general curricula. Based on our experience and comprehensive evaluation, a PBL guidebook for tutors and students has been published and delivered to both groups. We also developed an on-line evaluation system containing the evaluation forms for students and tutors. Excellence (2006 onwards): In this stage, the PBL website and learning resources will be further developed, and we are designing the system for on-line PBL practice. In conclusion, the introduction to PBL for medical education is reasonable and feasible. It requires strong administrative support, a long-standing and high commitment of the PBL committee, consensus among the faculty and an appropriate planning and evaluation mechanism.