Counting quality because quality counts: differing standards in master's in medical education programmes

Background: In the United Kingdom the medical teacher role is being formalised. One result is that Masters level programmes in medical education are proliferating; however little or no attempt has been made to capture any differences in quality offered by them. A small scale project (Allery et al. 2006) set out to rectify this omission. Aim: Drawing on data from that study, this paper considers the variation in standards across programmes. Specifically research methods training provided in MMEd courses and levels of support for researchers is investigated. Method: A secondary analysis of the data generated by the evaluative study and gathered via review of programme web sites, semi structured interviews with MSc course directors and case studies in two sites, identified from purposive sampling. Results: Variations in both taught and research elements were identified. The quality of the research experience was compromised for some students many of whom were poorly prepared to undertake educational research and the question of standards raised in respect of those institutions where the examination process lacked real academic rigour. Conclusions: The variance in research methods training and support raises a number of issues in relation to quality standards. The medical education community needs to engage in open and critical dialogue around the whole constellation of paradigms, methods and activities that pertain in educational research. Unless or until we address these deeper concerns, research into medical education will suffer through a lack of design flair, implementation and rigour.