Article
Academic education for midwifery science in an European consortium with coordinated assessment-tools
Search Medline for
Authors
Published: | July 28, 2022 |
---|
Outline
Text
For the development of a high quality in university education, the international scientific exchange is of fundamental importance. Coordinated terminology frameworks, such as the „International Classification of Nursing Practice”, are a prerequisite for qualified cooperation. With the new study and examination regulations from 2020, such a conceptual framework for teaching content is finally also available for the German-speaking area in the sense of a national, competence-oriented catalog of learning objectives for midwifery and can now be implemented in specific projects with software support.
The UCAN Consortium (Umbrella Consortium for Assessment Networks) is currently the world’s leading association for the training of medical students. There are now 77 partner institutions with 12,000 users working together and have already developed 700,000 test items.
In a project at the TU Dresden, independent midwifery examination content is now to be entered into the UCAN system as part of the midwifery course in order to guarantee or further develop the quality of the education. The exam content and formats that can then be used in the entire network are not only limited to questions for online and paper-based exams, but exam formats from OSCEs (Objective Structured Clinical Examination) Star-shaped case templates, questions on “Regions of Interest”, etc. are also supported. In Dresden, a wide range of teaching experiences and the corresponding test formats in interprofessional communication as well as communication between the healthcare professional and the person being supervised can be used.
The clearly defined and nationally and internationally coordinated midwifery science content increases the quality of the education on the one hand and the overall visibility of midwifery science as an independent profession on the other.
Ethics and conflicts of interest: A vote on ethics was not necessary. No personal data was processed. The research was financed by own resources. There are no conflicts of interest.