Author(s)

Anne Scherer, Thomas Forkmann, Sandra Sudmann, Siegfried Gauggel

Dean’s Office, Medical Faculty, Rheinisch-Westf?lische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Institute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology,University Hospital of the Rheinisch-Westf?lische Technische Hochschule Aachen, Aachen, Germany.

Introduction: With the introduction of a new curriculum “Modellstudiengang Medizin” in Aachen, the education in medical psychology was also restructured. This paper presents data from the students’ evaluations of the Basic Course in Medical Psychology and the new teaching format “Systemblock Psyche” over a three-year time span. Method: All students were asked to evaluate the courses anonymously online. Effect sizes [1] were calculated to compare acceptance of the different course types and also changes across time. Results: Both the Basic Course in Medical Psychology and the Systemblock Psyche were rated as “good” to “satisfactory” and were in their overall acceptance comparable to other courses and system blocks. Continuous improvement in acceptance was found for the Basic Course (d = 0.30 - 0.57). The Systemblock Psyche received varying evaluations but achieved higher scores on comprehensibility (d = 0.20) and communication among teachers (d = 0.34) than other system blocks. On the other hand, students rated the education in medical psychology as less relevant than other courses (d = 0.28 and 0.77, respectively). Conclusion: Overall, the acceptance rating was satisfactory and comparable to other evaluation studies conducted in earlier curricula. However, ratings of the relevance of the courses in medical psychology were disappointing and indicate the difficulty of teaching a biopsychosocial model to medical students.

Teaching Evaluation; Education in Medical Psychology; Modellstudiengang; Systemblock

A. Scherer, T. Forkmann, S. Sudmann and S. Gauggel, "Student Evaluations of the Courses in Medical Psychology at the Medical Department of the RWTH Aachen: A Three-Year Report," Open Journal of Medical Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 4, 2012, pp. 63-67. doi: 10.4236/ojmp.2012.14010.