Data and code for the Validation of a Spanish Questionnaire Implementing the Stanford Educational Framework for Evaluation of Clinical Teachers: MEDUC30

To provide satisfying evidence of validity and reliability to support MEDUC30’s usefulness in Spanish-speaking contexts, using confirmatory analytical methods. Method . This is an analytical, longitudinal and retrospective study, in which 24,681 MEDUC30 questionnaires evaluating 579 clinical teachers were analysed.

They were completed by medical students from 3rd to 7th year of study, from 2004 throughout 2015. The questionnaire’s structure was studied by exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Measurement invariance was evaluated with multi-group CFA.

Results . Four different models were compared; a bi-factor model was the best alternative to explain the data’s structure. It was composed of one general and six domain-specific factors: [i] Patient-Based Teaching, [ii] Communication of Goals, [iii] Evaluation and Feedback, [iv] Promotion of Understanding, Retention and Self-directed Learning, [v] Control of the Session, and [vi] Learning Climate.

The overall reliability of MEDUC30 scores was excellent (Cronbach’s α = .98, McDonald’s ω = .98) and that of the six specific factors was very good (Cronbach’s α =.88-.95, McDonald’s ω = .78-.94). Measurement invariance extended over teacher gender, date, semester, year of study, clinical teaching setting, and length of clinical rotation; all of these variables were sources of population heterogeneity. Conclusions .

MEDUC30 is a valid and reliable Spanish instrument to evaluate clinical teachers. It can be used to provide formative feedback of general and domain-specific effectiveness to clinical teachers and to provide accurate information to department heads and program directors for resource allocation and promotion purposes, and ultimately to improve clinical teaching quality.