A particular criteria system has been designed to evaluate medical program candidates. These admission policies must ensure uniform conditions and a fair assessment while using reliable and valid features. With the rapid development of technologies and machines, complex and efficient equipment has been created, allowing more comprehensive access and a range of services to the general public. The predictive validity of admission criteria for the Master’s studies is tightly related to instituting the policy, the relationship between the director of the medical program and evaluator, and prioritized questions for setting the criteria.
The process of establishing evaluation criteria may vary depending on the establishment and region. Most importantly, Master’s degree candidates must have bachelor graduates of Public Health programs or any other program that meets the curriculum requirements. Some programs require candidates to take a test or exam. However, one of the traditional approaches for admission is still the candidate’s cumulative grade point average or GPA. Some recent studies showed the correlation between the initial level of education with a successful career as a medical expert. In addition, those who had lower GPA and academic performance in early years, for whatever reasons, are more likely to be “at increased risk for subsequent professional misconduct (Panczyk, 2017). This tendency can be explained by inadequate time management and discouragement.
The main tactic to faculty development includes a complex system of tasks and roles, where management can be a tremendous obstacle when tackled simultaneously (Hays, 2018). Nonetheless, it is vital to remember that assessment criteria, especially without contextual considerations, have inherent limitations for work-based assessment (Han, 2021). Apart from a numeric coefficient of knowledge, the background variables, such as professional title or received Bachelor’s degree, were contributed to admission’s decision. Regardless of GPA, students with Bachelor’s degrees in Nursing or any other related to medicine degrees are favored by admission policy since those students have a high chance of success as well (Panczyk, 2017). The evaluation system based on the listed above variables has proven to be compelling and well-founded. However, it is still necessary to design a well-planned recruitment strategy that will meet the needs of a continuously growing number of medical professionals.
The relationship between the director of the medical program and the evaluator, when establishing evaluation criteria, should be considered since these rules must embody the university’s objectives and values. The access for valid assessment and specific set of features of an exam taker should guarantee higher academic success and ensure knowledge and skills that are essential for a medical worker. Both director and establisher have the same interest while accepting potential students to Master’s program and thus should cooperate in creating a universal set of criteria. The subsequent goal of both representatives is to encourage student’s participation in university life and involvement in studying. The SHAPE Program Director (OTU) hosted a patient forum for families of patients to provide social support, which helped the program receive positive feedback and prove its usefulness (Emengo, 2020). In addition, practical assessment contributes to the learning process and boosts leadership development (Alkaabi, 2020). In order to qualitatively evaluate educational programs, directors and evaluators are advised to question the reliability and academic dignity of the established academic plan.
It should be noted, to create a suitable and effective admission policy, appropriate questions have to be asked. Medical programs need an explicit and underlying aim embodied in a vision statement of establishment, or simply saying to have a culture that will be supported and motivate candidates. According to research, most people use five aspects to decide the value of something. To be precise, they are time, choice theory topic, entities involved, the direction of flow, and the importance of words (Rapport, 2020). The same question can be asked as a means to qualify the efficiency of the criteria of assessment. In short, each of the concepts can identify the core principles and means to achieve a particular goal and meet satisfactory standards for medical program candidates. Studies show that students have a limited understanding of assessment systems and find them subjective and non-transparent, which may be off-putting and discouraging when it comes to learning (Yoon, 2021). Clearly, the primary evaluation questions that supervisors and directors must prioritize must be related to the candidate’s perspective and understanding to guarantee further education and a high success rate, both as students and as future specialists.
To conclude, the process and relationship between the director of the medical program and the evaluators while initiating assessment criteria can be described as symbiotic and mutually beneficial since both representatives follow the same objective. While identifying the main bars and evaluation questions, it is necessary to keep in mind students’ engagement to maintain transparency and educational equity. The organized public health system is the best way to ensure the well-being of citizens and a benevolent attitude towards government and healthcare workers. Also, the procedure of hiring proficient and competent employees has been advanced, thus decreasing the presumed death rate and medical malpractice. By qualitatively characterizing candidate perceptions of the evaluation system, medical program directors and evaluators will increase interest in their program and provide a better educational experience.
References
Alkaabi, A. M., & Almaamari, S. A. (2020). Supervisory feedback in the principal evaluation process. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(3), 503–509.
Emengo, V. N., & et al. (2020). Qualitative program evaluation of social determinants of health screening and referral program. PloS One, 15(12), 0242964. Web.
Han, H., & et al. (2021). Attendings’ perceptions of authentic evaluation criteria for effective surgical consults. Journal of Surgical Education, 78(4), 1319–1327. Web.
Hays, R. (2018). Establishing a new medical school: A contemporary approach to personalizing medical education. Medical Teacher, 40(10), 990–995. Web.
Panczyk, M., & et al. (2017). Evidence-based selection process to the Master of Public Health program at Medical University. BMC Medical Education, 17(1), 157. Web.
Rapport, Z. (2020). The Five parts of evaluation questions. International Journal of Choice Theory & Reality Therapy, 39(2), 14–16. Web.
Yoon, J., & et al. (2021). Medical student perceptions of assessment systems, subjectivity, and variability on introductory dermatology clerkships. International Journal of Women’s Dermatology, 7(3), 323–330. Web.