ORIGINAL ARTICLE
The internal system for quality assessment of education results at a medical university
 
More details
Hide details
1
Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia
2
Kosygin State University of Russia, Moscow, Russia
3
Ulyanovsk State University, Ulyanovsk, Russia
4
National Research Ogarev Mordovia State University, Saransk, Russia
Publish date: 2018-07-11
 
Electron J Gen Med 2018;15(4):em70
KEYWORDS:
ABSTRACT:
Objective:
The problem of devising an education quality assessment system at a medical higher educational institution has been analyzed in the article. The authors compare the views on the interpretation of the concept of “quality of education”, as well as examine the principles and criteria for the quality of education. A new approach to the internal system for assessing the quality of education at a medical higher education is offered in the article on the basis of the integration of all the components of the pedagogical system. The following components of the internal system of education quality assessment are considered: the conceptual component (forecasting, planning the strategic areas of the educational process development to achieve the quality of education, the mission and objectives), the procedural content component (monitoring at the initial and final stages of the education quality assessment), the self-analysis component (the analysis of students, teachers, department chairs’ activity); the analytical component (visualization of information obtained on the basis of transparency, informational openness of learning and upbringing results, the analysis and elimination of identified shortcomings, the introduction of advanced pedagogical experience into the educational process).

Method:
The study was conducted at the FSAEI HE I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russian Federation (Sechenov University) in the period from February 2011 to March 2017. The sample group size was determined with the use of a special formula. Based on the sample size, 450 respondents were included in the study, and the number of people who would drop out was determined in the sample (n = 429), so the sample was representative in terms of quality and quantity. The students from 1 to 6 years were involved in the study in five training programs of the university who were randomly selected. An original questionnaire was devised. The questionnaire contained some standard questions and special questions on the research topic.

Results:
The main contingent of students is satisfied with the quality of education at Sechenov University and the level assessment of the quality of education is higher in comparison to other universities, but among the final-year students the assessment of the quality of education compared with other universities does not differ significantly. To attract applicants to FSAEI HE I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University the significant factors were: preserving a good reputation of the university (64.7%), prestige (53%) and the quality of education (50.7%). The most popular competencies among students of all the faculties and courses were the following: willingness to work with modern medical equipment (45% ± 2,3%), knowledge of innovative medical technologies (31,9% ± 2,2%). Almost every second student (55% ± 2.3%) believes that the quality of education at Sechenov University corresponds to the requirements of the current labor market.

Conclusion:
The conclusion has been drawn on the basis of the conducted research, that the internal system of assessing the quality of education is directed to increasing prestige of Russian higher medical education, its integration into the international educational space.

 
REFERENCES (22):
1. Potashnik MM. Quality management of education: Practical-oriented monograph and methodical manual. Moscow: The Pedagogical Society of Russia; 2006.
2. Panasyuk VP. Systematic management of the quality of education in school. Moscow: Research Center for Quality Problems in Training Specialists; 2000.
3. Sankin LA, Tonkonogaya YeP. Management of the quality of education in a liberal arts university. Izvestiya RAO. 2002;2:61-72.
4. Shishov SE., Kalneus VA. School: monitoring the quality of education. Moscow: The Pedagogical Society of Russia; 2000.
5. Tretyakov PA, Shamova TI. The management of the quality of education is the main direction in the development of the system: essence, approaches. The head teacher. 2002;7:67-72.
6. Selezneva NA. The quality of higher education as an object of system research. Moscow: Publishing Center for Quality Problems in Training Specialists; 2003.
7. Gusinsky EN. Construction of the theory of education on the basis of an interdisciplinary system approach. Moscow: School; 1994.
8. Chuchalin A, Gerasimchuk I. The quality of higher education as a socially significant result. Almamater. 2004;11:26-32.
9. Skok GB, Lebedeva EA. Management of the quality of education at the university on the basis of the opinion of the consumer of educational services. University education: practice and analysis. Ekaterinburg. 2001;3(18):72-77.
10. Harvey L, Green P. Defining Quality. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 1993;18(1):9–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/026029....
11. Van Damm D. Standards and Indicators in Institutional and Programme Accreditation in Higher Education. UNESCO CEPES; 2003.
12. Puchkov NP. Formation of a quality assurance system for the training of a specialist in the conditions of a technical college. Phd. Moscow: Russian State Library; 2005.
13. Deming E. The way out of the crisis. Tver: Alba; 1994.
14. Voskoboynikova M, Pugacheva N, Chepuryshkin I. The quality of education as a factor of the university’s competitiveness. Higher education in Russia. 2008;5:139-143.
15. Rastorgueva NF. The quality of education is a guarantee of the competitiveness of the graduate. Higher education in Russia. 2009;1:87-90.
16. Esenbaeva GA, Kakenov KS. The quality of education: the concept of the university. International Journal of Applied and Fundamental Research. 2015;2-8:1497-1500.
17. Petrova VN. From theory to practice of developing the experience of creative and self-educational activities of students. Bulletin of the development of science and education. 2012;5:82-87.
18. Petrova VN. The role of pedagogy in the training of residents. Medical education and university science. Moscow: Publishing House of the First Moscow State Medical University, 2017;1(9):38-42.
19. Petrova VN. The role of reflection in the training of residents. Medical education and university science. Moscow: Publishing House of the First Moscow State Medical University Sechenov, 2018;1(11):36-44.
20. Astin A. Achieving Educational Excellence: A Critical Assessment of Priorities and Practices in Higher Education. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass Inc. 1985:25–31.
21. Bogue, EG, Saunders RL. The Evidence for Quality. Strengthening the Tests of Academic and Administrative Effectiveness. San-Francisco. Jossey-Bass Inc; 1992.
22. Gnedova SB, Emelyanenkova AV, Mikhailova IV, Sedunova AS, Enyashina NG, Salakhova VB. Individual Characteristics of Students in the Course of Professional Development (as Exemplified by the Ulyanovsk Region of Russia). Asian Social Science. 2015;11(3):168-176.
eISSN:2516-3507