Dresden Faculty selection procedure for medical students: what impact does it have, what is the outcome? []

dc.creator	Koch, Thea
dc.creator	Dieter, Peter
dc.creator	Graupner, Anke
dc.creator	Klupp, S.
dc.creator	Hänsel, Mike
dc.date	2010-04-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-08-12T11:20:50Z
dc.date.available	2015-08-12T11:20:50Z
dc.identifier	10.3205/zma000662
dc.identifier	1860-7446
dc.identifier	1860-3572
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/92043d9496c046cc85f39c486f20e902
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/28545
dc.description	[english] Since 2004 German universities have been able to use a selection procedure to admit up to 60 percent of new students. In 2005, the Carl Gustav Carus Faculty of Medicine at Dresden introduced a new admission procedure. In order to take account of cognitive as well as non-cognitive competencies the Faculty used the following selection criteria based on the legal regulations for university-admissions:In order to evaluate the effects of the Faculty admission procedures applied in the years 2005, 2006 and 2007, the results on the First National Medical Examination (FNME) were compared between the candidates selected by the Faculty procedures (CSF-group) and the group of candidates admitted by the Central Office for the Allocation of Places in Higher Education (the ZVS group, comprising the subgroups: ZVS best, ZVS rest and ZVS total). The rates of participation in the FNME within the required minimum time of 2 years of medical studies were higher in the CSF group compared to the ZVS-total group. The FNME pass rates were lowest in the ZVS rest group and highest in the ZVS best group. The ZVS best group and the ZVS total group showed the best FMNE results, whereas the results of the CSF-group were equal or worse compared to the ZVS rest group. No correlation was found between the interview results and the FNME results. According to studies of the prognostic value of various selection instruments, the school leaving grade point average seems the best predictor of success on the FNME. In order to validate the non-cognitive selection instruments of the Faculty procedure, complementary instruments are needed to measure non-cognitive aspects that are not captured by the FNME-results.
dc.publisher	German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
dc.relation	http://www.egms.de/static/en/journals/zma/2010-27/zma000662.shtml
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1860-7446
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/1860-3572
dc.rights	CC BY-NC-ND
dc.source	GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung, Vol 27, Iss 2, p Doc25 (2010)
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.title	Dresden Faculty selection procedure for medical students: what impact does it have, what is the outcome? []
dc.type	article