Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health
Home About us Ahead Of Print Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Editorial Board Login 
Users Online:154
  Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
LETTER TO THE EDITOR  
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 416
How nonmedical academic expert percept and criticize on postdoctoral training on humanistic medical science?


Department of Public Health Curriculum, Surindra Rajabhat University, Surin, Thailand

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication14-Nov-2016
 

How to cite this article:
Wiwanitkit V, Kaewla W. How nonmedical academic expert percept and criticize on postdoctoral training on humanistic medical science?. Ann Trop Med Public Health 2016;9:416

How to cite this URL:
Wiwanitkit V, Kaewla W. How nonmedical academic expert percept and criticize on postdoctoral training on humanistic medical science?. Ann Trop Med Public Health [serial online] 2016 [cited 2017 Mar 28];9:416. Available from: http://www.atmph.org/text.asp?2016/9/6/416/193951
Dear Sir,

An important thing to promote the public health and medical curriculum is to have a good system to check and validate the acceptability of any new curriculum.[1] Vroeijenstijn noted that “school or faculty must ensure its quality and is accountable for the quality of the training it provides.”[1] Here, we present our experience on the curriculum criticizing process by the academic committee of Surindra Rajabhat University, Thailand. The mentioned curriculum is “postdoctoral training on humanistic medical science.” The academic committee of Surindra Rajabhat University has the duty to criticize and verify the curriculum before the final acceptance for teaching in the university. As a new public health curriculum, the members of academic committee (all are nonmedical academic experts and professors) discuss and criticize the curriculum in several aspects. As nonmedical academic expert, no member of the committee discusses the specific content in medicine and public health. All discuss on the context and structure of curriculum according to the basic educational standards, and there is also specific comment on the accountant and financial aspect in curriculum management. Based on this observation, it seems that nonmedical academic experts can percept on general aspect of the public health curriculum, but the experts do not touch on the specific contents. To promote a good accreditation process, the criticizing and validation of any new public health curriculum should collect the ideas from both medical and nonmedical experts. For example, the issue on staggering financial constraints is better to receive the idea from an expert in accountancy.[2]

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Vroeijenstijn AI. Quality assurance in medical education. Acad Med 1995;70 7 Suppl: S59-67.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Rovin S. A curriculum for primary care dentistry. J Dent Educ 1977;41:176-90.  Back to cited text no. 2
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Wasana Kaewla
Surindra Rajabhat University, Surin
Thailand
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1755-6783.193951

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed478    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded2    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal