Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
High stakes are involved in student selection, for both medical schools and applicants. This thesis investigated the effects of selection on the medical student population and applicant pool in the Dutch setting.
This thesis consists of six papers: two quantitative studies, one qualitative study, two mixed methods studies and one perspective paper based on a review of the literature.
(1) Compared with a lottery, selection does not result in a student population with better motivation, engagement and performance, both in the clinical and pre-clinical phases of the study. (2) Selection seems to have a temporary stimulating effect on student motivation through enhancing perceived autonomy, competence and relatedness. (3) Applicants adopt a strategic approach, based on the selection procedure, in their choice of medical school. (4) The description of an applicant’s motivation is not a reliable and valid tool to assess motivation during selection. (5) Gaining healthcare experience is crucial for applicants’ motivation, but inequalities in access to such experiences can demotivate certain student groups from applying to medical school. (6) The gains yielded from selection compared with a lottery seem to be small. Unintentionally induced self-selection among certain groups of students and biased selection procedures may compromise student diversity.
The added value of selection procedures compared with a weighted lottery for admitting students to medical school is questionable. Students are generally motivated and perform well, irrespective of how they enrolled in medical school. Selection yields only small gains, while student diversity may be hampered.
Patterson F, Knight A, Dowell J, Nicholson S, Cousans F, Cleland J. How effective are selection methods in medical education? A systematic review. Med Educ. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2016;50:36:60.
Hofstee WK. The case for compromise in educational selection and grading. In: Anderson SB, Helmick JS, editors. On educational testing. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bass. 1983:109–27.
Ten Cate TJ. Medical education in the Netherlands. Med Teach. 2007;29:752–7. CrossRef
Cleland J, Dowell J, Mclachlan J, Nicholson S, Patterson F. Research Report Identifying best practice in the selection of medical students. London: General. Council: Medical; 2012.
Deci EL, Ryan R. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York and London: Plenum; 1985. CrossRef
Kusurkar RA, Ten Cate TJ, Van Asperen M, Croiset G. Motivation as an independent and a dependent variable in medical education: A review of the literature. Med Teach. 2011;33:e242–e62. CrossRef
Kusurkar RA, Croiset G, Galindo-Garré F, Ten Cate TJ. Motivational profiles of medical students: association with study effort, academic performance and exhaustion. Bmc Med Educ. 2013;13:87. CrossRef
Young ME, Razack S, Hanson MD, et al. Calling for a broader conceptualization of diversity: Surface and deep diversity in four Canadian medical schools. Acad Med. 2012;87:1501–10. CrossRef
Heath C, Stoddart C, Green H. Parental backgrounds of Otago medical students. N Z Med J. 2002;115:1165.
Wouters A, Croiset G, Galindo-Garre F, Kusurkar RA. Motivation of medical students: selection by motivation or motivation by selection. Bmc Med Educ. 2016;16:1. CrossRef
Kusurkar R, Croiset G, Kruitwagen C, Ten Cate TJ. Validity evidence for the measurement of the strength of motivation for medical school. Adv Health Sci Educ. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2011;16:183:95.
Black AE, Deci EL. The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective. Sci Educ. 2000;84:740–56. CrossRef
Wouters A, Croiset G, Schripsema NR, et al. A multi-site study on medical school selection, performance, motivation and engagement. Adv Health Sci Educ. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017;1:16.
Vansteenkiste M, Sierens E, Soenens B, Luyckx K, Lens W. Motivational profiles from a self-determination perspective: The quality of motivation matters. J Educ Psychol. 2009;101:671–88. CrossRef
Schaufeli WB, Martinez IM, Pinto AM, Salanova M, Bakker AB. Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2002;33:464–81. CrossRef
Wouters A, Croiset G, Schripsema NR, et al. Students’ approaches to medical school choice: relationship with students’ characteristics and motivation. Int J Med Educ. 2017;8:217–26. CrossRef
Wouters A, Bakker AH, van Wijk IJ, Croiset G, Kusurkar RA. A qualitative analysis of statements on motivation of applicants for medical school. Bmc Med Educ. 2014;14:200. CrossRef
Wouters A, Croiset G, Isik U, Kusurkar RA. Motivation of Dutch high school students from various backgrounds for applying to study medicine: a qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2017;7:e14779. CrossRef
Wouters A, Croiset G, Kusurkar RA. Should. School Selection be replaced by Lottery? [Manuscript in preparation]
Hubbeling D. Lottery for medical school admission. Med Teach. 2017;39:222–3. CrossRef
Powis D. Selecting medical students: An unresolved challenge. Med Teach. 2015;37:25260. CrossRef
General Medical Council. Outcomes and standards for undergraduate medical education. Manchester, UK: General. Council: Medical; 2009.
- Effects of medical school selection on student motivation: a PhD thesis report
- Bohn Stafleu van Loghum