Negative attitudes of teachers and academic leaders (as a result of opinions such as...) (23 comments) | CS are not practically used The material used to teach CS is not scientific CS are innate skills CS cannot be taught The introduction of CS training threatens both teachers’ subjects and their own academic statuses |
Marginal presence in the curriculum: organisation and structure (30 comments) | CS training is incorporated as a theoretical subject in an ad hoc style during preclinical periods CS training is incorporated in a fragmented way (in different subjects) CS training is included in subjects with other non-clinical content (humanities, ethics, history of medicine, psychology) There is no transversal structure with coherent teaching aims |
Negative student attitudes (as a result of opinions such as...) (11 comments) | Students do not understand the use of CS CS training includes reductionist and scientific epistemological interpretations CS training is not important because it is not assessed CS training is not useful for the MIR (medical intern) exam CS training is not important because it is of a marginal or secondary nature in the curriculum CS are innate and subjective and cannot be learned |
Limited and poorly trained teaching staff (13 comments) | There are no teachers with an appropriate academic status The clinicians use a weak or negative model Teachers have no training in CS or teaching methods |
Teaching and assessment methods needed (21 comments) | Teachers do not use experience-based teaching methods Experience-based methods are expensive CS training requires more time CS training requires continuity and the commitment of teaching staff CS training requires a relatively sophisticated infrastructure CS training requires complex assessment systems that are not necessarily well known |