Montano, Diego

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","137"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","17"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Tjark"],["dc.contributor.author","Montano, Diego"],["dc.contributor.author","Poinstingl, Herbert"],["dc.contributor.author","Dreiling, Katharina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schiekirka-Schwake, Sarah"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Steinbuechel, Nicole von"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:43:52Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:43:52Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","BACKGROUND: The seven categories of the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP) represent a framework for planning and assessing medical teaching. Nevertheless, so far there is no specific evaluation tool for large-group lectures that is based on these categories. This paper reports the development and psychometric validation of a short German evaluation tool for large-group lectures in medical education (SETMED-L: 'Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures') based on the SFDP-categories. METHODS: Data were collected at two German medical schools. In Study 1, a full information factor analysis of the new 14-item questionnaire was performed. In Study 2, following cognitive debriefings and adjustments, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed. The model was tested for invariance across medical schools and student gender. Convergent validity was assessed by comparison with results of the FEVOR questionnaire. RESULTS: Study 1 (n = 922) yielded a three-factor solution with one major (10 items) and two minor factors (2 items each). In Study 2 (n = 2740), this factor structure was confirmed. Scale reliability ranged between α = 0.71 and α = 0.88. Measurement invariance was given across student gender but not across medical schools. Convergent validity in the subsample tested (n = 246) yielded acceptable results. CONCLUSION: The SETMED-L showed satisfactory to very good psychometric characteristics. The main advantages are its short yet comprehensive form, the integration of SFDP-categories and its focus on medical education."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s12909-017-0970-8"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15135"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/58988"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.intern","In goescholar not merged with http://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14707 but duplicate"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Erziehungswissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Empirische Bildungsforschung mit dem Schwerpunkt Schul- und Unterrichtsforschung"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","Evaluation of large-group lectures in medicine – development of the SETMED-L (Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures) questionnaire"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]