Evaluation of new program of ICM

Introduction: One of the most important changes in medical education programs in Iran has been designing and implementing course of Introduction to Clinical Medicine (ICM) in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. This study determines the methods and results of process evaluation (from CIPP evaluation) used for ICM revision and evaluation program. This study aimed to provide evidences about its efficiency and extract its executive disadvantages and limitation. Method: This is an evaluation study conducted in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Data were collected through descriptive studies and in most cases, self-administrated questionnaire was used. In some cases, comparing the final MCQ scores was used. This evaluation was done during conducting new ICM program. Separate evaluation tools were prepared in several steps and used for each course at the end of that. These Steps are literature review, preparing draft questionnaire, getting feedback from, and consulting with main stakeholders of evaluation and preparing the final questionnaires. The content and face validity of the questionnaires were confirmed by experts of education after conducting a pilot study and the reliability were checked by Cronbach's Alpha coefficient. Results: The results showed that the students have more positive attitude toward EBM course. Students believed that ICM was an appropriate section for learning medical records. They were not satisfied with management of medical records course by nursing department, identifying learning objectives and the extent of accessing to them, time devoted to this lesson, teaching method, sources and evaluation method. Evaluation of communication skills course showed students’ positive attitude toward this course and their learning of this course. Overall students' satisfaction in most items of ICM course (volume of ICM course, resources, evaluation methods, exams intervals, content of tests, arrangement of packages, volume of lessons, arrangement of practical courses, giving information) was more in old ICM program than the new one. Clinical students agreed with all changes. Mean score of sign and symptom and pathophysiology of disease showed a slight increase in new ICM program (insignificant statistically). Frequency of the failed student decreased from 18 student-units in old ICM program to 10 student-units in new one. Conclusion: The results showed a relatively successful experience in reviewing and evaluating a medical education program. Regarding complexity of reviewing and evaluating medical education programs, this study can be used as a guide for designing other similar researches that are effective in future planning and decision-makings.