"Medical School Evaluation Standards Should Be Enhanced and Evaluator Training Strengthened"

Objective Criteria Remain Ambiguous and Open to Interpretation
KIMEE Emphasizes 'Quality Management in Medical Education'

There have been calls for the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation (KIMEE) to further advance its evaluation criteria for medical schools and to strengthen the capabilities of its evaluators in order to enhance the credibility of its assessments.

At the '2025 Korean Medical Association Scientific Conference' held on the 13th at Plenty Convention in Seocho-gu, Seoul, attendees are speaking. Photo by Choi Taewon

On the 13th, KIMEE officials and deans of medical schools discussed these topics under the theme "KIMEE's Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future" at the '2025 Korean Medical Association Scientific Conference' held at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital's Plenty Convention in Seocho-gu, Seoul.

According to Heo Jeongsik, President of the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation, the current KIMEE evaluation uses the "ASK 2019" standards, which are based on the international standards for basic medical education proposed by the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME). The evaluation results are divided into either accreditation or non-accreditation, and a non-accreditation decision can be deferred for one year.

There is also considerable discussion about how to evaluate future developments, such as advances in digital health technology. President Heo stated, "We are discussing how to reflect technological advancements, such as online or VR (virtual reality) education, in evaluations and to what extent they should be permitted," adding, "We are also considering ways to advance our standards so that we can assess qualitative innovation and social responsibility."

However, regarding the "qualitative evaluation" criteria, which have been a source of dissatisfaction among the medical schools being evaluated, he drew a line by saying that this is due to the nature of medical education. President Heo explained, "Many people who write evaluation reports ask why there are no clear criteria," adding, "While quantitative measures would be the easiest for report writers, the characteristics of medical education make it difficult to rely solely on quantitative evaluation, which leads to these challenges."

Complaints from front-line medical schools also continued. Lim Youngseok, Dean of Ulsan University College of Medicine, said, "The KIMEE evaluation is extremely burdensome because of the threat of non-accreditation," and added, "The objective criteria for KIMEE's evaluation are quite ambiguous, and there is too much room for interpretation."He continued, "Even after receiving the highest rating, two years later we may face a deferral of non-accreditation, and being subject to such unpredictability is extremely difficult."

A former medical school dean also pointed out, "KIMEE hardly discloses any details of its evaluations, apparently because it anticipates many complaints," and added, "Universities can only develop if KIMEE establishes and announces transparent evaluation criteria."

In response to these complaints, President Heo said, "There are parts I agree with and parts I do not," and added, "First, we will strengthen training for evaluators to reduce bias."

An Deokseon, former KIMEE president and moderator of the session, stated, "While KIMEE's evaluation criteria have been based on international standards, there was a time when domestic medical schools were not yet fully prepared," and added, "Now that all 40 medical schools have developed, it should be possible to establish mutually acceptable standards through sufficient communication between KIMEE and the universities."