No abstract

No abstract

A barrier to the development and refinement of ethics education in and across health professional schools is that there is not an agreed upon instrument or method for assessment in ethics education. The most widely used ethics education assessment instrument is the Defining Issues Test (DIT) I & II. This instrument is not specific to the health professions. But it has been modified for use in, and influenced the development of other instruments in, the health professions. The DIT contains certain philosophical assumptions ("Kohlbergian" or "neo-Kohlbergian") that have been criticized in recent years. It is also expensive for large institutions to use. The purpose of this article is to offer a rubric-which the authors have named the Health Professional Ethics Rubric-for the assessment of several learning outcomes related to ethics education in health science centers. This rubric is not open to the same philosophical critiques as the DIT and other such instruments. This rubric is also practical to use. This article includes the rubric being advocated, which was developed by faculty and administrators at a large academic health science center as a part of a campus-wide ethics education initiative. The process of developing the rubric is described, as well as certain limitations and plans for revision.

Background: Ethics education is essential to the education of all healthcare professionals. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an interprofessional approach to ethics education to all students across an academic health science center. Research objectives: The objectives were to (1) compare student perception of ethics education before and after the implementation of the campus-wide ethics program and (2) determine changes in student ethical decision-making skills following implementation of a campus-wide ethics program. Research design: This study was a quasi-experimental design with seniors graduating prior to the intervention serving as the control group. Participants and research context: The setting was a comprehensive health science center in the southwestern United States. All students enrolled in the university participated in the intervention; however, 976 graduating students were used for evaluation of the intervention. Ethical considerations: Study materials for each survey were submitted to the university’s IRB, and the project was approved as exempt by the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects. Student participation in the surveys was voluntary. No names or other identifying information were collected, and responses to the survey questions were kept confidential. Findings: Students’ perception of the adequacy of time spent on the ethics content in course instruction and practical training decreased from the baseline to the fifth-year survey. Students’ overall comfort level with their abilities to deal with ethical issues increased from the baseline to the fifth year. Student ethical decision-making skills were higher at the third-year evaluation for all indicators. For the fifth-year survey, responses were also higher scoring on all four indicators. Discussion: After participation in an interprofessional campus-wide effort on health professions ethics, students demonstrated higher ethical decision-making scores according to the Health Professional Ethics Rubric. However, their scores still did not reach the proficiency level identified in the rubric. Conclusion: Examination of the effectiveness of each part of the intervention is needed.

Background: Prior to initiating interprofessional ethics education, assessment of current student learning of ethics content within their professional schools is essential. Few studies have included direct measures of student learning on ethics and professionalism. This article reports findings from a mixed methods student survey conducted at a comprehensive health science center. Purpose: The purpose of the survey was to explore student self-perception with regard to their knowledge of health professional ethics as well as their ability to analyze selfreported encounters with ethical dilemmas. Methodology: The survey spanned six health professional schools: a dental school, a graduate school, a medical school, a nursing school, a school of biomedical informatics, and a school of public health. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ANOVA with Tukey HSD post hoc. Qualitative data were analyzed with a rubric and then qualitative content analysis was conducted to determine common themes. Results and Conclusions: The findings indicate a need for the continued teaching of ethics and professionalism curricula to health professional students in all schools of this health science center, and qualitative results indicate future topics to be pursued in interprofessional teaching and learning.