METHODS: We conducted a multicentre instrumental case study across three international medical programmes, all of which were characterised by an international student intake, an internationalised curriculum and international partnerships, and all of which used English as the medium of instruction. We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with purposively sampled curriculum directors and teaching staff. Participants shared their personal experiences and responded to ethical concerns expressed in the literature. Our multidisciplinary team performed a template analysis of the data based on theoretical frameworks of ethics and social responsibility.
RESULTS: Participants primarily experienced the internationalisation of their institutions and programmes as having a positive impact on students, the university and the future global society. However, they did face several ethical dilemmas. The first of these involved the possibility that marketisation through international recruitment and the application of substantial tuition fees might widen access to medical education, but might allow weaker students to enter medical schools. The second concern referred to the homogenisation of education methods and content, which offers opportunities to expose students to best practices, but may also pose a risk to education quality. The third issue referred to the experience that although student diversity helped to promote intercultural learning, it also jeopardised student well-being.
CONCLUSIONS: In the eyes of teaching staff in international medical education, internationalisation can benefit education quality and society, but poses ethical dilemmas through the forces of marketisation, homogenisation and diversification. The findings reflect a tension between the views of scholars and those of practitioners. The critical perspective found in academic debates is largely missing in practice, and theoretical frameworks on ethics possibly overlook the benefits of international education. To facilitate ethical decision making, we propose that scholars and practitioners globally try to learn from each other.
Methods: This is a qualitative study with a phenomenological approach. It starts with a literature review using large databases, followed by interviews with 10 representative experts from medical schools in Indonesia.
Results: Based on the 10 studies retrieved, several components of faculty development were identified as the basis for the model. Ten experts gave input for the model. Components of the model can be grouped into: (i) content, which is materials that need to be delivered; (ii) process components, which depict aspects related to the preparation, execution and evaluation of sustainable faculty development; and (iii) components in the educational system that affect faculty development implementation.
Conclusion: A comprehensive review and development process has likely made this faculty development model suitable for medical schools in Indonesia. Breaking the model into components may help medical schools to prioritise certain aspects related to faculty development programmes.