Validation of a Spanish questionnaire implementing the Stanford Educational Framework for Evaluation of Clinical Teachers


Validation of a Spanish questionnaire implementing the Stanford Educational
Framework for Evaluation of Clinical Teachers

Marcela Bitrana*, Manuel Torres-Sahlia y Oslando Padillab

a Centro de Educación Médica, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia
Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
b Departamento de Salud Pública, Escuela de Medicina,
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.

Recibido el 31 de enero de 2017; aceptado el 13 de junio de 2017

* Autor de correspondencia: Marcela Bitran, Centro de Educación
Médica, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de
Chile. Avenida Diagonal Paraguay 362, Santiago, Chile.

Palabras Clave

Docente clínico; evaluación; calidad; cuestionario; validación

Keywords

clinical teacher; evaluation; effectiveness; instrument; validity


Abstract

Introduction: Although there are instruments in Spanish to evaluate teacher performance during the initial basic science training years or during medical specialization; there are few instruments for the clinical training years, in which the main role of the teacher is to facilitate experiential learning. The MEDUC30 questionnaire is a Spanish instrument developed by the Pontificia Universidad Católica School of Medicine. It was built using the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP) educational framework for evaluation of clinical teachers’ effectiveness by students. MEDUC30 has been used since 2004 at Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile and was previously studied with exploratory methods.

Objective: To provide satisfying evidence of validity and
reliability to support MEDUC30’s usefulness in Spanish-speaking contexts, using confirmatory analytical methods.

Method: This is an analytical, longitudinal and retrospective study, in which 24,681 MEDUC30 questionnaires evaluating 579 clinical teachers were analysed. They were completed by medical students from 3rd to 7th year of study, from 2004 throughout 2015. The questionnaire’s structure was studied by exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Measurement invariance was evaluated with multi-group CFA.

Results: Four different models were compared; a bi-factor model was the best alternative to explain the data’s structure. It was composed of one general and six domain-specific factors: [i] Patient-Based Teaching, [ii] Communication of Goals, [iii] Evaluation and Feedback, [iv] Promotion of Understanding, Retention, and Self-directed Learning, [v] Control of the Session, and [vi] Learning Climate. The overall reliability of MEDUC30 scores was excellent (Cronbach’s α = .98, McDonald’s ω = .98) and that of the six specific factors was very good (Cronbach’s α =.88-.95, McDonald’s ω = .78-.94). Measurement invariance extended over teacher gender, date, semester, year of study, clinical teaching setting, and length of clinical rotation; all of these variables were sources of population heterogeneity.

Conclusions: MEDUC30 is a valid and reliable Spanish instrument to evaluate clinical teachers. It can be used to provide formative feedback to clinical teachers and to provide accurate information to department heads and program directors for resource allocation and promotion purposes.