Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)
Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a de facto standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were dev...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice 2015-10, Vol.20 (4), p.1027-1032 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1032 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 1027 |
container_title | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Kelly, Martina Bennett, Deirdre Muijtjens, Arno O’Flynn, Siun Dornan, Tim |
description | Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a
de facto
standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were developed by consensus. Reasoning that an instrument would perform best if it were underpinned by a clearly conceptualized link between environment and learning as well as psychometric evidence, we developed the mixed methods Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI), eliminated redundant items, and published validity evidence for its 8 item and 2 subscale structure. Here, we set out to compare MCPI with DREEM. 104 students on full-time clinical placements completed both measures three times during a single academic year. There was good agreement and at least as good discrimination between placements with the smaller MCPI. Total MCPI scores and the mean score of its 5-item learning environment subscale allowed ten raters to distinguish between the quality of educational environments. Twenty raters were needed for the 3-item MCPI training subscale and the DREEM scale and its subscales. MCPI compares favourably with DREEM in that one-sixth the number of items perform at least as well psychometrically, it provides formative free text data, and it is founded on the widely shared assumption that communities of practice make good learning environments. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1711541026</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1074022</ericid><sourcerecordid>2259137904</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-c82b15a47b0f8063b7b425a2b9274b1dd64ac7b08f3e8921c930ba2b292d53783</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUuL1TAYhosozkV_gAsl4GZcVHNtkpXImXpjBmHQdUjSr06HNjmTtA7nJ_ivzbHHEQRXCXme90vCW1XPCH5NMJZvMsFc6BoTUWuhaM0fVMdESFaTRsqHZc_2h1o3R9VJzjcYY0aUelwdUSGkUBIfVz83NqARckYO0BQTvEWbOG1tGnIMKPaoYFUPM0xoO1oPE4QZ3S52HOYdmsDmJQG6G-ZrNF8DEnhVz5fQAaArsN0Otd3i7TzEYEfUhh9DiuH3lMtD-uz8qm0vXz2pHvV2zPD0sJ5W3963Xzcf64svHz5t3l3Unmk-115RR4Tl0uFe4YY56TgVljpNJXek6xpufYGqZ6A0JV4z7AqmmnaCScVOq7N17jbF2wXybKYhexhHGyAu2RBJiOAE06aoL_9Rb-KSyj-yoVRowqTGvFhktXyKOSfozTYNk007Q7DZ92TWnkzpyex7MvvMi8PkxU3Q3Sf-FFOE56sAafD3uP1MsOSY0sLpynNh4Tukv0_7_62_AK2EpVM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2259137904</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>Kelly, Martina ; Bennett, Deirdre ; Muijtjens, Arno ; O’Flynn, Siun ; Dornan, Tim</creator><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Martina ; Bennett, Deirdre ; Muijtjens, Arno ; O’Flynn, Siun ; Dornan, Tim</creatorcontrib><description>Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a
de facto
standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were developed by consensus. Reasoning that an instrument would perform best if it were underpinned by a clearly conceptualized link between environment and learning as well as psychometric evidence, we developed the mixed methods Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI), eliminated redundant items, and published validity evidence for its 8 item and 2 subscale structure. Here, we set out to compare MCPI with DREEM. 104 students on full-time clinical placements completed both measures three times during a single academic year. There was good agreement and at least as good discrimination between placements with the smaller MCPI. Total MCPI scores and the mean score of its 5-item learning environment subscale allowed ten raters to distinguish between the quality of educational environments. Twenty raters were needed for the 3-item MCPI training subscale and the DREEM scale and its subscales. MCPI compares favourably with DREEM in that one-sixth the number of items perform at least as well psychometrically, it provides formative free text data, and it is founded on the widely shared assumption that communities of practice make good learning environments.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1382-4996</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25575870</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Adult ; Clinical Clerkship ; Clinical Competence ; Clinical Experience ; Communities of Practice ; Education ; Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods ; Educational Environment ; Educational Measurement - methods ; Evidence ; Female ; Health Education ; Humans ; Ireland ; Male ; Measures (Individuals) ; Medical Education ; Mixed Methods Research ; Psychometrics ; Social Environment ; Student Placement ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Validity</subject><ispartof>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2015-10, Vol.20 (4), p.1027-1032</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015</rights><rights>Advances in Health Sciences Education is a copyright of Springer, (2015). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-c82b15a47b0f8063b7b425a2b9274b1dd64ac7b08f3e8921c930ba2b292d53783</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-c82b15a47b0f8063b7b425a2b9274b1dd64ac7b08f3e8921c930ba2b292d53783</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1074022$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25575870$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bennett, Deirdre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muijtjens, Arno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Flynn, Siun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dornan, Tim</creatorcontrib><title>Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)</title><title>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</title><addtitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</addtitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><description>Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a
de facto
standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were developed by consensus. Reasoning that an instrument would perform best if it were underpinned by a clearly conceptualized link between environment and learning as well as psychometric evidence, we developed the mixed methods Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI), eliminated redundant items, and published validity evidence for its 8 item and 2 subscale structure. Here, we set out to compare MCPI with DREEM. 104 students on full-time clinical placements completed both measures three times during a single academic year. There was good agreement and at least as good discrimination between placements with the smaller MCPI. Total MCPI scores and the mean score of its 5-item learning environment subscale allowed ten raters to distinguish between the quality of educational environments. Twenty raters were needed for the 3-item MCPI training subscale and the DREEM scale and its subscales. MCPI compares favourably with DREEM in that one-sixth the number of items perform at least as well psychometrically, it provides formative free text data, and it is founded on the widely shared assumption that communities of practice make good learning environments.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Clinical Clerkship</subject><subject>Clinical Competence</subject><subject>Clinical Experience</subject><subject>Communities of Practice</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</subject><subject>Educational Environment</subject><subject>Educational Measurement - methods</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health Education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ireland</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Measures (Individuals)</subject><subject>Medical Education</subject><subject>Mixed Methods Research</subject><subject>Psychometrics</subject><subject>Social Environment</subject><subject>Student Placement</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Validity</subject><issn>1382-4996</issn><issn>1573-1677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUuL1TAYhosozkV_gAsl4GZcVHNtkpXImXpjBmHQdUjSr06HNjmTtA7nJ_ivzbHHEQRXCXme90vCW1XPCH5NMJZvMsFc6BoTUWuhaM0fVMdESFaTRsqHZc_2h1o3R9VJzjcYY0aUelwdUSGkUBIfVz83NqARckYO0BQTvEWbOG1tGnIMKPaoYFUPM0xoO1oPE4QZ3S52HOYdmsDmJQG6G-ZrNF8DEnhVz5fQAaArsN0Otd3i7TzEYEfUhh9DiuH3lMtD-uz8qm0vXz2pHvV2zPD0sJ5W3963Xzcf64svHz5t3l3Unmk-115RR4Tl0uFe4YY56TgVljpNJXek6xpufYGqZ6A0JV4z7AqmmnaCScVOq7N17jbF2wXybKYhexhHGyAu2RBJiOAE06aoL_9Rb-KSyj-yoVRowqTGvFhktXyKOSfozTYNk007Q7DZ92TWnkzpyex7MvvMi8PkxU3Q3Sf-FFOE56sAafD3uP1MsOSY0sLpynNh4Tukv0_7_62_AK2EpVM</recordid><startdate>20151001</startdate><enddate>20151001</enddate><creator>Kelly, Martina</creator><creator>Bennett, Deirdre</creator><creator>Muijtjens, Arno</creator><creator>O’Flynn, Siun</creator><creator>Dornan, Tim</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151001</creationdate><title>Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)</title><author>Kelly, Martina ; Bennett, Deirdre ; Muijtjens, Arno ; O’Flynn, Siun ; Dornan, Tim</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-c82b15a47b0f8063b7b425a2b9274b1dd64ac7b08f3e8921c930ba2b292d53783</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Clinical Clerkship</topic><topic>Clinical Competence</topic><topic>Clinical Experience</topic><topic>Communities of Practice</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods</topic><topic>Educational Environment</topic><topic>Educational Measurement - methods</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health Education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ireland</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Measures (Individuals)</topic><topic>Medical Education</topic><topic>Mixed Methods Research</topic><topic>Psychometrics</topic><topic>Social Environment</topic><topic>Student Placement</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Validity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bennett, Deirdre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Muijtjens, Arno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Flynn, Siun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dornan, Tim</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kelly, Martina</au><au>Bennett, Deirdre</au><au>Muijtjens, Arno</au><au>O’Flynn, Siun</au><au>Dornan, Tim</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1074022</ericid><atitle>Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM)</atitle><jtitle>Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice</jtitle><stitle>Adv in Health Sci Educ</stitle><addtitle>Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract</addtitle><date>2015-10-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1027</spage><epage>1032</epage><pages>1027-1032</pages><issn>1382-4996</issn><eissn>1573-1677</eissn><abstract>Clinical clerks learn more than they are taught and not all they learn can be measured. As a result, curriculum leaders evaluate clinical educational environments. The quantitative Dundee Ready Environment Measure (DREEM) is a
de facto
standard for that purpose. Its 50 items and 5 subscales were developed by consensus. Reasoning that an instrument would perform best if it were underpinned by a clearly conceptualized link between environment and learning as well as psychometric evidence, we developed the mixed methods Manchester Clinical Placement Index (MCPI), eliminated redundant items, and published validity evidence for its 8 item and 2 subscale structure. Here, we set out to compare MCPI with DREEM. 104 students on full-time clinical placements completed both measures three times during a single academic year. There was good agreement and at least as good discrimination between placements with the smaller MCPI. Total MCPI scores and the mean score of its 5-item learning environment subscale allowed ten raters to distinguish between the quality of educational environments. Twenty raters were needed for the 3-item MCPI training subscale and the DREEM scale and its subscales. MCPI compares favourably with DREEM in that one-sixth the number of items perform at least as well psychometrically, it provides formative free text data, and it is founded on the widely shared assumption that communities of practice make good learning environments.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>25575870</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1382-4996 |
ispartof | Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2015-10, Vol.20 (4), p.1027-1032 |
issn | 1382-4996 1573-1677 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1711541026 |
source | MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals |
subjects | Adult Clinical Clerkship Clinical Competence Clinical Experience Communities of Practice Education Education, Medical, Undergraduate - methods Educational Environment Educational Measurement - methods Evidence Female Health Education Humans Ireland Male Measures (Individuals) Medical Education Mixed Methods Research Psychometrics Social Environment Student Placement Surveys and Questionnaires Validity |
title | Can less be more? Comparison of an 8-item placement quality measure with the 50-item Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T12%3A47%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can%20less%20be%20more?%20Comparison%20of%20an%208-item%20placement%20quality%20measure%20with%20the%2050-item%20Dundee%20Ready%20Educational%20Environment%20Measure%20(DREEM)&rft.jtitle=Advances%20in%20health%20sciences%20education%20:%20theory%20and%20practice&rft.au=Kelly,%20Martina&rft.date=2015-10-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1027&rft.epage=1032&rft.pages=1027-1032&rft.issn=1382-4996&rft.eissn=1573-1677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10459-015-9582-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2259137904%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2259137904&rft_id=info:pmid/25575870&rft_ericid=EJ1074022&rfr_iscdi=true |