DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Internal Validity of Korean Medicine Education Evaluation and Accreditation

한의학교육평가인증 내적타당화에 대한 고찰

  • Received : 2021.11.29
  • Accepted : 2021.12.23
  • Published : 2021.12.31

Abstract

This study intends to examine the indicators of Korean medicine education that are directly required in the field, in the process of developing and rationalizing the second cycle of evaluation and accreditation standards for the Colleges of Korean medicine and present indicators to the Korean medicine education community. To this end, we conducted the Delphi survey on six Korean medicine education experts, and the second cycle evaluation and accreditation standards were developed after verifying the validity of the contents and through a public hearing on three experts. Based on the research results of this study, we make the following suggestions: First, the support of Korean medical education institutions should be considered. The Korean medical education institution operates the Korean medicine hospital under each institution's name. Thus, criteria for evaluation shall be considered according to the number of beds and the support of schools. Second, for the second cycle of evaluation, all six members of the evaluation committee were professors of Korean medicine; however, in the future, each group of the evaluation committee needs to be composed of an external curriculum and evaluation experts to seek the evaluation focusing on education. Third, it is necessary to include curriculum and evaluation experts in the development stage of education programs and institutional evaluation and accreditation standards. Fourth, the experts of the curriculum should be included as the members of the curriculum development team of the College of Korean Medicine. This study is meaningful as a study to improve the quality of Korean medicine education.

본 연구는 제2주기 한의과대학 평가인증기준을 개발하여 타당화하는 과정에서 현장에서 직접적으로 요구되는 한의학교육의 지표는 무엇인지 고찰하고, 한의학교육계에 지표를 제시하고자 하였다. 이를 위하여 6인의 한의과대학 교육전문가를 대상으로 델파이 조사를 수행하였으며, 전문가 3인에게 내용타당도 검증 및 공청회를 거쳐 제2주기 평가인증기준을 개발하였다. 본 연구의 연구결과를 바탕으로 다음의 제언을 둔다. 첫째, 한의학교육기관의 지원을 고려해야 한다. 한의학교육기관은 각 기관명의 한방병원을 운영하고 있다. 병상 수와 학교의 지원을 고려하여 평가준거를 고려해야 한다. 둘째, 2주기 평가 당시 평가위원은 6인 모두 한의학과 교수를 대상으로 이루어졌으나, 향후 평가위원의 한 모둠당 1인은 외부 교육과정 및 평가전문가로 구성하여 교육에 초점을 둔 평가를 모색할 필요가 있다. 셋째, 교육프로그램 및 기관 평가인증기준을 개발 단계부터 교육과정 및 평가전문가 포함될 필요가 있다. 넷째, 한의학대학 교육과정 개발진으로 교육과정 전문가가 포함되어 구성되어야 한다. 본 연구는 한의학교육의 질적 향상을 위한 연구로서 그 의의가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. The Ministry of Education Science and Technology. (2011). A Study on the Basic Policy Direction of Academic Field (Program) Evaluation and Certification. The Ministry of Education Science and Technology.
  2. Noh, W. K. (2008). A study for the development and effects of learning strategy rubrics: Focused on college students' learning strategy educational program. Journal of Educational Technology. 24(4):259 https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.24.4.259
  3. Ahn, K. S. (2003). Measures to improve the quality of education at oriental medical schools in Korea. Scientific thought (47). 107-118.
  4. Lee, J. W. (2008). The Influence of Student-Generated Rubrics on Achievement and Ability to Put Information Literacy into Practice in Informatics Subject Performance Assessment. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Korea National University of Education, Chung-Ju.
  5. Institute of Korean Medicine and Evaluation (IKMEE). (2018). The second Evaluation and certification manual for Korean medicine education. Institute of Korean Medicine and Evaluation.
  6. Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management science, 9(3), 458-467. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458
  7. English, J. M., & Kernan, G. L. (1976). The prediction of air travel and aircraft technology to the year 2000 using the Delphi method. Transportation Research, 19(10), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0041-1647(76)90094-0
  8. Erickson, H. L. (1995). Stirring the Head. Heart, and Soul (Redefining Curriculum and Instruction), California: Corwin Press, Inc.
  9. European Association in Higher Education (ENQA) (2005). Standards And Guidelines for Quality Assurance in The European Higher Education Area. Helsinki: Multiprint.
  10. Goodrich, H. (1996). Understanding rubrics. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 14-17.
  11. Gracht, H. A. (2008). The future of logistics: scenarios for 2025. Univerza v Mariboru, Fakulteta za logistiko.
  12. Landeta, J. (2006). Current Validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 73(5), 467-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2005.09.002
  13. Wiggins, G. (1996). What is a rubric? A dialogue on design and use. A handbook for student performance assessment in an era of restructuring, 6, 1-13.
  14. law.go.kr. (Search, 2021. 3. 2.). The higher education acts. (Amendment on December, 22, 2015).