1 / 18

Considerations When Planning an Accreditation System

Considerations When Planning an Accreditation System. Sabri K EMAHLI , M.D . Ankara University, Faculty of Medicine Turkey. Why accreditation (in Turkey)?. Increase in the number of medical schools (50+) Different curricula employed (Traditional- integrated)

danil
Télécharger la présentation

Considerations When Planning an Accreditation System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Considerations When Planning an Accreditation System Sabri KEMAHLI, M.D. Ankara University, Faculty of Medicine Turkey

  2. Why accreditation (in Turkey)? • Increase in the number of medical schools (50+) • Different curricula employed (Traditional- integrated) • PBL introduced in increasing number of medical schools- in differing weights • Clinical skills labs introduced in many schools • Differences in the faculty members- number and seniority • National core curriculum defined in 2001

  3. Entrance to Medical Education • Centrally administered university entrance examination • Considerable differences in medical school entrants- according to their scores- • Major question: Are all medical school graduates equally trained?/ Do all medical schools meet some minimum requirements? • How can we be sure?

  4. Two initiatives • Examinations planned for all medical students after 3rd and 5th years (as a prerequisite for graduation) • Accreditation scheme planned by Council of Medical Schools Deans

  5. Principles Discussed While Planning • Initiative should be started by Deans (Council) • Accrediting body should be an independent organisation • Deans’ influence on the process should be minimum; Deans cannot work as members of accreditation council and other committees • All stakeholders should be represented (faculty members, students, MoH, practising doctors) • Example:

  6. First organised as a body of the Engineering Deans’ Council • Later a society was established • Members of Accreditation Council first named by the Deans’ Council- following nominations by accreditation council autonomously

  7. Accreditation Organisation • Deans’ Council • National Medical Accreditation Council • Standards Committee • Pre-evaluation, Counselling and Training Committee • Visitation and Follow-up Committees

  8. Accreditation Organisation

  9. National Medical Accreditation Council • 7 faculty members from 7 different medical schools • 4 members nominated by Turkish Medical Association (1 university faculty member, 1 specialist from state hospitals, 1 general practitioner, 1 free practicing doctor) • 1 doctor nominated by the Ministry of Health • 2 student representatives from 2 different medical schols • 1 Secretary nominated by Secretary General of Deans Council

  10. Standard Setting and Development Committee • 4 faculty members from Departments (Units) of Medical Education of 4 different medical schools • 3 faculty members, one from each of basic, surgical and internal medical sciences • 1 general practitioner • 1 student representative

  11. Accreditation Types • Full accreditation (6 years) • Accreditation candidacy (re-visit in 1 year) • Re-accreditation (after 6 years; provided the medical school successful in the interim period of 3 years)

  12. Institutional self-evaluation of the medical school External evaluation based on the report of self-evaluation and a site visit Final report by the review team containing recommendations regarding the decision on accreditation Decision on accreditation. Pre-evaluation, Counselling and Training Committee Visitation and Follow-up Committee Visitation and Follow-up Committee Accreditation Council Main elements in the process of accreditation The WHO/WFME Guidelines

  13. Accreditation Process Pre-evaluation, c.&t.committee report submitted to medical school counselling/training given to medical school, if required/demanded Final decision by NMAC NMAC decision for visitation programme October January March May July December July Site Visit Application to Accreditation Council (NMAC) Self-evaluation report submitted to NMAC

  14. Possible Problems • Voluntary basis- difficulty in finding volunteers-pioneers (medical schools) • Acceptance by the faculty members might be difficult • Only a few people to work • Setting standards- which standards? WFME global/European standards and national specifications

  15. Work Ahead • Setting the standards- national specifications • Planning the application and evaluation process details • Format of the self-evaluation report • Training the evaluation teams and the applicant medical schools

  16. THANK YOU

  17. Accreditation Process • January: Application to Accreditation Council (NMAC) • Pre-evaluation, counselling and training committeeReport submitted to medical schoolIf required/demanded counselling/training given to medical school (July) • Until October: Self-evaluation report submitted to NMAC • NMAC decision for visitation programme (until December) • Visit by the Visitation Committee (March-May) and report submitted to NMAC • Decision by NMAC (until July)

More Related