Socrates programme transnational cooperation projects final report

Task Force 4 Stage 1 Activity 1 The TTF work was structured around initial objectives pursued during all 3 years and not in different stages following each other i.e. activities were organized in order a) To improve the transparency, clarity and public understanding of medical education and its outcomes (ACTIVITY 1) and b) To Hold workshops to clarify the Bologna Process on the implementation of the 2-cycle system in Medical Studies (Activity 2,3,4,5) the Bologna Process in General ( (Activity 6,7,8)
Brief description of activity or workpackage	1 Development of MedEdCentral: Pilot Launching December 2006 / Full Launching: September 7, 2007 Developed as a comprehensive collection of entries related to medical education stored in an online repository, suitably coded using a standard set of descriptors and available for easy and quick retrieval by users: Anyone registered and logged in to MedEdCentral will be invited to contribute to all fields in the existing entries. Editors have been appointed to ‘police’ entries made in their content area to guard against inappropriate additions. Contributors may also suggest a new entry to the database which will be subject to editorial review before it is added to the resource. Initially entries in MedEdCentral are in English. See website (www.MedEdCentral.org) and appendices
Organisations involved	1 AMEE and other universities and associations regarding Core Group members namely: AMEE, University of Lisbon, IFMSA, Jagiellonian University, Barcelona University, EMA (European Medical Association), Giessen University, Medical University of Warsaw
Start date (dd/mm/yyyy)	1 February 2005	1 End date (dd/mm/yyyy)	1 September 2007	Number of days
Aims and objectives	1 Development of MedEdCentral concept Implementation of Pilot Phase Implementation of Full Launching
Description of specific tasks undertaken and outcomes	1 Defining content and format Establishing resource functionality Defining tasks and responsibilities Defining the Editorial Board Adding content: inventory of Medical schools worldwide, medical Education Glossary, Medical Education institutions etc. Results of surveys relating to Bologna Process and other topics Enhancing user interface Discussion forum Database maintenance
Evaluation of outcomes	1 Positive feedback showing very good acceptance from participants attending the dissemination actions. Several institutions already initiate different actions to disseminate MedEdCentral. This resource will enhance the transparency of medical education. It offers the advantages of a pragmatic approach with simplicity / practicability, shared ownership, collaborative writing, recognition of the range of stakeholders and target audiences in a dynamic evolving process building on a powerful tool for communication/exchanges.
Describe and justify any changes to or variations from the original workplan	1 Full launching only was possible in September 2007 due to technical problems
Impact on the project of changes to the workplan	1 Involvement of core group and task force members started in 2005. Other users started only after full launching in September 2007.

Task Force 4 Stage 2 Activity 2, 3,4, 5 Activities on the clarification of the progress made in relation to the implementation of the 2-cycle system in Medical Studies
Brief description of activity or workpackage	2 Workshop : “State of the implementation of the Bologna two-cycle format in European medical education” (2006) 3 Short Survey on the ”Implementation of the Bologna two-cycle format in European medical education” (2007) 4 Symposium ”State of the implementation of the Bologna two-cycle format in European medical education”. (2007) 5.Article submitted to Medical Teacher: “ Implementation of the Bologna two-cycle system in medical education: Where do we stand in 2007? - Results of an AMEE- MEDINE survey” Article already accepted for publication. See confirmation letter in appendix
Organisations involved	2. Organization of this workshop implied 7 Institutions (AMEE, University of Lisbon, University of Utrecht, Ghent University, St Georges, University of London, Karolinska Institutet) 3. Organization of the survey implied 3 Institutions (AMEE, University of Lisbon, University of Utrecht) and contacts with representatives of Bologna Minister in 46 countries 4. Organization of the symposium implied contacts with 5 Institutions (AMEE, University of Lisbon, University of Utrecht, University of Groningen and University of Geneva) 5. Three Institutions AMEE, University of Lisbon, University of Utrecht were involved in the preparation of the article
Start date (dd/mm/yyyy)	2 Mar 2006 3 December 2006 4 May 2007 5 August 2007	End date (dd/mm/yyyy)	2 September 2006 3 October 2007 4 August 2007 5 October 2007	Number of days
Aims and objectives	2 The aim of the workshop was to compare and contrast how far different European countries have reached in the transformation process, to exchange experiences and to discuss any issues which arise. 3 Following the AMEE 2006 workshop an AMEE/MEDINE short survey on the state of the implementation of the Bologna two-cycle format in European Medical Education was conducted 4 The aim was to discuss the state of implementation of the two-cycle system in medical education in all 46 countries that signed the Bologna agreement. The objective is to present the results of a brief survey in all countries. Invited speakers from countries which already adopted the system have reported on major challenges, strengths and weaknesses, and lessons for the future. Students’ Associations have also been invited to bring their views on the topic 5 The aim is to facilitate future harmonization by presenting the survey results and symposium conclusions regarding the implementation of the 2 cycle system in all Bologna countries.
Description of specific tasks undertaken and outcomes	2. The session was structured as follows Setting the Theme - Olle ten Cate Short presentations on current situation regarding 2-cycle implementation in the following countries The Netherlands (Prof Jan Borleffs, UMC Utrecht), Belgium (Prof Anselm Derese, Ghent University), the UK (Prof Peter McCrorie, St Georges, University of London), Portugal (Dr Madalena Patricio, University of Lisbon), Sweden (Prof Jan-Olov Höög, Karolinska Institutet). Discussion - full discussion with all participants supported by the electronic system for voting. 3. The survey was primarily addressed to the Representatives of the Ministers in the 46 countries which signed the Bologna declaration (Bologna Follow-up Group) and then to well informed persons. Responses were obtained from 46 countries. 4. The session was structured as follows: Welcome and summary of Bologna conference workshop AMEE 2006; issues for today; the voting system and Overview of known arguments pros and cons of the two cycle system (Olle ten Cate) Presentation results of a survey among (all) countries that have signed the Bologna Agreement, about the factual state of implementation of the two cycle system (Madalena Patrício) Students’ views on the two-cycle system in medicine (Souad Derraz ) Examples for EU schools of how the two-cycle system works in practice: what benefits and obstacles have been experienced? - Groningen University (Janke Cohen) - Geneva University (Elisabeth van Gessel) General discussion with the audience (Olle ten Cate and Madalena Patrício) 5. The article presents data on the number of medical Schools in each country, number of years regarding the pre-graduation curriculum and the legal situation in each country with respect to the implementation of the 2 cycle system.
Evaluation of outcomes	2 The workshop allows us to understand that many medical educators in Europe are not aware of their national legislation regarding the Bologna two-cycle system. There is no lack of opinions, but little knowledge of facts. Indeed, neither AMEE, nor MEDINE-network of European medical education are aware of the extent in which European nations force medical schools to adopt a two-cycle system. Feedback obtained from participants was also very positive 3 The survey rate of response (100%) is already a good indicator of the importance of the survey. Dissemination of the survey will contribute to Harmonization of the Bologna process. 4 Feedback obtained from participants was very positive indicating how important the symposium to disseminate the information got with the survey and to present concrete examples on how the system is functioning in countries adopting the 2-cycle. 5 Good quality of the article (based on the fact that it was accepted for publication)
Describe and justify any changes to or variations from the original workplan	2 Not applicable 3 Not applicable 4 Not applicable 5 Not applicable
Impact on project on changes to the workplan	2 Not applicable 3 Not applicable 4 Not applicable 5 Not applicable