Search

Internationalisation is a broad term that has been used to encompass a range of activities including international student recruitment, student mobility and exchange, international teaching and research collaborations, institutional partnerships, and embedding international and/or intercultural perspectives within curricula. There are numerous drivers for institutions to develop an internationalisation strategy including building global reputation and influence, having a positive influence on communities, income generation, and helping their students gain a global perspective or develop intercultural competencies. Health students benefit from internationalisation activities as they will enter a workforce that increasingly engages with global diseases and works within multicultural societies. However, there are risks associated with internationalisation that stem from disjointed institutional decision making, power imbalances, and neo-colonial attitudes. There are also multiple barriers to effectively engaging in internationalisation including individual student circumstances, staff and institutional preparedness, and geopolitical factors. Within this broader context, internationalisation of the curriculum (IoC) is aimed at incorporating international, intercultural, and global dimensions into the curriculum, including consideration of content, teaching methods, learning outcomes, and how these are supported at a program and institutional level. This is a major undertaking requiring alignment of philosophy between teaching academics, senior university leadership, and the relevant professional body. Examples of IoC within health programs, and the significant challenges involved, are critically discussed in this paper, and strategies to overcome these challenges highlighted. Whilst recognising the challenges, this paper concludes that undertaking purposeful IoC is a critical step towards ensuring that the future health workforce is adequately prepared for the 21st Century environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The "Virtual Semester for Medical Research Aachen" (vSEMERA) is an international, interdisciplinary, virtual education program developed for health profession students. The first edition (2021) was hosted by the Medical Faculty of RWTH Aachen University (Germany) in cooperation with Centro Universitário Christus (Brazil) and Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (Peru). The primary aim of the 12-weeks program was to provide students with skills in health science research and prepare them for scientific career paths. Methods: vSEMERA was built on a virtual learning platform, the "vSEMERA-Campus", designed to foster students' learning process and social interactions. Maximum flexibility was offered through synchronous and asynchronous teaching, enabling participants to join via any device from any part of the Globe alongside their regular studies. For the program's first edition (September - November 2021), health profession students from Germany, Brazil, Peru, Spain, and Italy filled all 30 available spots. Satisfaction, quality of the program and courses offered, as well as perceived learning outcomes, were examined using questionnaires throughout and at the end of the program. Results: The program received a rating of 4.38 out of 5 stars. While it met most expectations (4.29 out of 5), participants were unable to attend as many courses as intended (2.81 out of 5), mainly due to scheduling conflicts with the home university schedule (46%), internships (23%), and general timing issues (31%). Participants acknowledged considerable improvements in their scientific skills, English language skills, confidence in scientific project management, research career progression, and enthusiasm for a scientific career. Conclusions: vSEMERA represents a promising example of an online international learning and exchange program using pedagogical and technological elements of virtual collaboration and teaching. In addition to advancing future vSEMERA editions, our results may offer insights for similar projects that address the targeted integration of scientific research education into an international, digital learning environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Abroad medical electives are recognized as high-impact practice and considered a necessity to provide global health training. As of recently, the COVID-19 pandemic and its related travel restrictions prohibited most international elective activities. Another important barrier to abroad electives that received comparably little attention is elective and application fees, which – combined – may be as high as $5000 per month, and may prevent students with limited financial resources from applying for an international elective. Elective fees have never been systematically analyzed and trends in teaching and application fees have rarely been subject to dedicated scientific investigations. Methods: Using data from two large elective reports databases, the authors addressed this gap in the literature. The authors analyzed trends in abroad elective fees within the last 15 years in some of the most popular Anglo-American elective destinations among students from Germany, including the United States of America, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of South Africa, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Results: The authors identified n = 726 overseas elective reports that were uploaded between 2006 and 2020, of which n = 438 testimonies met the inclusion criteria. The United Kingdom and Australia were the most popular elective destinations (n = 123 and n = 113, respectively), followed by the Republic of South Africa (n = 104) and the United States of America (n = 44). Elective fees differed substantially—depending on the elective destinations and time point. Median elective fees were highest in the United States of America (€ 1875 for a 4-week elective between 2018–2020), followed by the Republic of South Africa (€ 400) and Australia (€ 378). The data also suggests an increasing trend for elective fees, particularly in the United States. Conclusions: Rising fees warrant consideration and a discussion about the feasibility of reciprocity and the bidirectional flow of students in bidirectional exchange programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data on the perceptions of medical students on international experience in non-English-speaking high-income countries (HICs) are very limited. This study aimed to assess the perceptions of medical students in Japan toward overseas experience while in school and post-graduation, as well as to characterize the support they require to pursue their profession in international settings. Methods: A cross-sectional national survey was administered online between September 16, 2020, and October 8, 2020. Participants were recruited from 69 medical schools using snowball sampling through acquaintances and social media platforms. The survey results were analyzed by two researchers. Results: A total of 548 students from 59 medical schools responded to the survey. Among them, 381 respondents (69%) expressed interest in working abroad, while only 40% seriously considered it. The majority of students responded that they would like to pursue clinical training abroad for a short term or while they were medical students (54%) or during a residency/fellowship (53%). The most popular regions among the respondents for future international experiences were North America and Europe. Finally, the most reported reasons for hesitation to work abroad were language barriers (70%), followed by lack of clarity regarding career options after working abroad (67%), difficulties obtaining medical licensure abroad (62%), and the lack of role models (42%). Conclusions: Although nearly 70% of participants reported a high interest in working overseas, various barriers to working abroad were identified. Our findings identified key problem areas that could be targeted when promoting international experiences for medical students in Japan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To provide just equity in academic exchange, as well as to reduce prohibitive travel cost and address environmental concerns, the past paradigm of international student exchange has fundamentally shifted from one directional travel to mutually beneficial bidirectional remote communication between students all over the globe. Current analysis aims to quantify cultural competency and evaluate academic outcomes. Methods: Sixty students half from the US and half from Rwanda grouped in teams of 4 engaged in a nine-month project-focused relationship. Cultural competency was evaluated prior to project initiation and six months after completion of the project. Student perspective of project development was analyzed weekly and final academic outcome was evaluated. Results: Change in cultural competency was not significant; however, students did identify satisfaction in team interaction and academic outcomes were achieved. Conclusion: A single remote exchange between students in two countries may not be transformative but it can provide cultural enrichment and successful academic project outcome and may serve to enhance cultural curiosity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the learning experience of students by limiting their opportunities for face-to-face intercultural exchanges. Given the importance of cultural competence in medical education, there is a need to develop a programme that promotes cultural awareness, but that offers more flexibility in terms of outbound mobility. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an internationalization at home programme and to explore the learning experiences of medical and nursing students from Hong Kong and Indonesia. Methods: Students were recruited from two universities in Hong Kong and Indonesia. They attended an online internationalization at home programme designed by members of the research team from both countries. A mixed-methods study was conducted using a concurrent triangulation approach. A pre-test post-test design was used to evaluate the effects of the programme on cultural awareness, and four focus groups were conducted to explore the students' experiences in the programme. Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed by T-test and reflexive thematic analysis, respectively. Data were integrated and triangulated using joint displays by comparing findings from both sources. Results: One hundred and forty-eight students from Hong Kong and Indonesia participated in the study. After the programme, there was a significant improvement in cultural awareness. Three themes were identified: (1) learning process: enjoyable, but a desire remains for face-to-face cross-cultural communication; (2) learning outcomes: gained cultural awareness, developed cultural sensitivity, had an opportunity to practice language and learn about new learning styles; (3) factors influencing learning outcomes: facilitators (micro-movie and active communication) and barriers (language barrier, inappropriate time arrangement, insufficient prior briefing). Conclusion: This programme achieved the learning outcomes by successfully enhancing the cultural awareness of students during a time of pandemic when outbound student exchanges were not possible. Further adaptations of the programme are required to enhance different learning outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Debates have arisen in various non-English speaking countries over the chosen language of instruction in medical education, whether it has to be the English language or the mother tongue. English-based education supporters argue that English is the leading international language of medicine and research, and a crucial tool for Continuing Medical Education (CME), as well as for students who seek practice abroad. On the other hand, mother-tongue-based medical education supporters present it as a way to endorse communication and comprehension between medical practitioners and health care system users, to bridge the gap between practitioners and the paramedical staff, and to overcome linguistic dualism and the language thinking disparity while studying in another. This study aimed to evaluate one of the simplified bi-lingual approaches in terms of medical-educational-written texts for a non-English speaking population: Arabic speaking medical students in specific. Methods: 1546 Arabic-speaking-medical students from different countries participated in a one-step-interactive-experimental-online test. The test assessed participants' scientific comprehension of three distinct written paragraphs: The first paragraph used conventional mother tongue (Arabic), the second combined English terminology and simplified mother tongue (hybrid), and the third used an English excerpt (English). Two multiple-choice questions (First question in Arabic, second in English) followed each paragraph. Response time was communicated for each paragraph. Participants were asked to select their favorable method. Repeated Measures ANOVA models and Paired Samples t-Test were used for statistical analysis. Results: Participants scored a mean of [0.10] for the Arabic paragraph, [0.72] for the hybrid paragraph, and [0.24] for the English paragraph (P < 0.001). Results showed a significantly higher mean of points and correct answers within the fastest time for the hybrid paragraph [0.68] compared to the Arabic [0.08] and English [0.18] paragraphs (P < 0.001). Moreover, 50% of participants preferred the hybrid paragraph over the other two paragraphs. Conclusions: Taking into consideration the large number of participants and the statistically significant results, authors propose that simplified Arabic combined with English terminology may present a viable alternative method for medical-educational-written texts in Arabic-speaking population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]