Scholarlink

<p>The evaluation of medical education apps is paramount for ensuring their effective implementation, particularly in the post-COVID-19 landscape. The study aims to evaluate medical education mobile apps using two current and validated evaluation tools. It also explores how effectively these tools measure the mobile app’s impact on the medical education outcomes. Following the screening of 409 records using the PRISMA method, 30 mobile apps in the field of medical education were evaluated employing the MARS (Mobile Application Rating Scale) and MARuL (Mobile App Rubric for Learning) assessment tools. A majority of mobile apps received acceptable scores: 20 mobile apps (67%) met the MARS threshold (&gt; 0.3), and 22 mobile apps (73%) met the MARuL threshold (&gt; 51). Findings indicate that while MARS and MARuL provide useful evaluations, both inadequately address pedagogical aspects within the TPACK model; MARS overlooks educational objectives, and MARuL omits key criteria such as cognitive development, practice targets, motivation, goal orientation, effective scaffolding, self-directed learning, curriculum oriented, critical thinking and authenticity.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluation of medical education mobile apps with MARS and MARuL in a TPACK informed model

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月11日

查看全文
  • Mohammadsadegh Rezaei,
  • Sara Owrangi,
  • Sahar Jafari

摘要

The evaluation of medical education apps is paramount for ensuring their effective implementation, particularly in the post-COVID-19 landscape. The study aims to evaluate medical education mobile apps using two current and validated evaluation tools. It also explores how effectively these tools measure the mobile app’s impact on the medical education outcomes. Following the screening of 409 records using the PRISMA method, 30 mobile apps in the field of medical education were evaluated employing the MARS (Mobile Application Rating Scale) and MARuL (Mobile App Rubric for Learning) assessment tools. A majority of mobile apps received acceptable scores: 20 mobile apps (67%) met the MARS threshold (> 0.3), and 22 mobile apps (73%) met the MARuL threshold (> 51). Findings indicate that while MARS and MARuL provide useful evaluations, both inadequately address pedagogical aspects within the TPACK model; MARS overlooks educational objectives, and MARuL omits key criteria such as cognitive development, practice targets, motivation, goal orientation, effective scaffolding, self-directed learning, curriculum oriented, critical thinking and authenticity.