Curriculum, Data, and LMS Studies at Yonsei (2020–2025)
Three studies at Yonsei University College of Medicine cover a review of the DMH curriculum, the design of a longitudinal data model for medical education, and the construction of the learning management system YES 3.0. This post sets out each study's subject, theoretical framework, findings, and the authors' proposals. Alongside earlier work it discusses how educational goals carry through to learning experiences, how longitudinal data are composed, and the conditions under which system operation serves education.
Three studies following CDP2013
The fourth curriculum reform at Yonsei University College of Medicine (CDP2013, 2010 onward) sought to establish student-centered, outcome-based, research-centered integrated education. The reform introduced an absolute grading system, a research curriculum, the DMH curriculum, and learning communities. The Department of Medical Education provided theoretical guidance and conducted academic research. The Office of Educational Support provided administrative support. The context of this reform is described in An (2018).
Across the three studies, the researchers reviewed the design and implementation of the DMH curriculum, developed a model for collecting longitudinal data, and documented the development and implementation of a learning management system. The studies progress from curriculum (2020) → data infrastructure (2022) → operational platform (2025).
| Study | Subject | Framework or method | Main content |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lee and An (2020) | DMH curriculum | Kern’s six-step curriculum development model | Review of curriculum reform, student participation and reflection, follow-up tasks |
| Jung, Lee, Kim, and An (2022) | Medical education cohorts and longitudinal data | Astin’s I-E-O model | Model design by educational stage, organization of survey domains and timing |
| Jung, Kim, Rhee, Lee, An, and Lee (2025) | Learning management system YES 3.0 | Case description of the development and implementation process | Members collaborated to reflect the needs of medical education |
The DMH curriculum and Kern’s six-step model
The study by Lee and An (2020) used the Kern model to review the DMH (Doctoring and Medical Humanities) curriculum at Yonsei University College of Medicine. The six steps are problem identification and general needs assessment, targeted needs assessment, goals and objectives, educational strategies, implementation, and evaluation and feedback.
The DMH curriculum was designed to engage students in learning through clinical cases, with assessment methods that emphasized student reflection. Student satisfaction was high, and students preferred small-group discussions. The researchers interpreted these findings as reflecting medical humanities education’s emphasis on self-awareness and changes in attitudes over acquiring information. They proposed systematically analyzing the outcomes of reflection and developing indicators to assess educational competencies as follow-up tasks.
The I-E-O model and longitudinal data
The study by Jung, Lee, Kim, and An (2022) used data from Yonsei University College of Medicine to develop a model for establishing cohorts and constructing longitudinal datasets. Based on Astin’s input-environment-output (I-E-O) model, the researchers aligned survey domains and timing with each stage of medical education.
The researchers viewed this design as a first step toward organizing the university’s data longitudinally. They discussed how other medical schools could apply the design to manage and use surveys.
The learning management system YES 3.0
The study by Jung, Kim, Rhee, Lee, An, and Lee (2025) described the development and implementation of the Yonsei Medical E-Learning System 3.0 (YES 3.0). This learning management system was built at Yonsei University College of Medicine. The authors cited the changing medical education environment and the limitations of the previous system as the reasons for this work.
YES 3.0 supports real-time monitoring of learning progress, comprehensive evaluation and grade management, personalized learning path recommendations, effective management of learner histories, and management of interviews and guidance. To support the revised CDP2023 (Curriculum Development Project 2023) curriculum, the system integrates learning across all courses and strengthens the advanced elective track.
Faculty, students, staff, and system developers collaborated to build a system tailored to the needs of medical education.
Related literature
The framework presented by Kern et al. (1998) outlined six steps, beginning with identifying needs and progressing through setting objectives, choosing educational strategies, implementation, and evaluation and feedback. In the DMH study by Lee and An (2020), participatory classes organized around clinical cases correspond to the educational strategies step. Assessment methods emphasizing reflection correspond to the evaluation step.
The article by Hafferty (1998) described medical education as an organizational learning environment encompassing formal educational content and the values and norms students learn in everyday life. The author identified organizational policies, evaluation, resource allocation, and language practices as areas where the hidden curriculum becomes apparent. The work by Astin (1991) used the I-E-O model to link characteristics at entry, the educational environment, and educational outcomes. It discussed ways to use assessment information to improve education. The study by Jung, Lee, Kim, and An (2022) used this model to organize survey domains and timing by stage of medical education.
The article by Ellaway et al. (2014) discussed data integration and pattern analysis in health professional education. It linked findings from knowledge discovery, prediction, and anomaly detection to practical steps for improvement. The article by Gašević et al. (2015) argued for placing learning theory and educational context at the center of learning analytics and explaining how digital records relate to learning processes. Interpreting longitudinal data and learning management system records depends on establishing which learning experiences the collected data items and recorded activities represent.
The study by Park et al. (2012) analyzed experiences with establishing and operating a learning management system and a computer-based test system at a medical school in Korea, along with student opinions. The researchers examined functions supporting course administration and assessment, ease of use, and technical and usability problems.
References
- 안신기. (2018). 의과대학 교육과정 개편에 대한 통시적 고찰: 연세대학교 의과대학을 중심으로 [박사학위논문, 연세대학교 대학원].
- An, S. K. (2018). A diachronic study of medical school curriculum reform: Focusing on Yonsei University College of Medicine [Doctoral dissertation, Yonsei University].
- 이이레, 안신기. (2020). 의료인문학 교육과정 개편에 대한 Kern의 교육과정개발 모델에 근거한 비판적 성찰. 의학교육논단, 22(3), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.2020.22.3.173
- Lee, Y., & An, S. K. (2020). A critical review of medical humanities education curriculum development based on Kern’s curriculum development model. Korean Medical Education Review, 22(3), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.2020.22.3.173
- 정한나, 이이레, 김혜원, 안신기. (2022). I-E-O 모형에 근거한 의학교육 종단자료 구축을 위한 모형 설계. 의학교육논단, 24(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.2022.24.2.156
- Jung, H., Lee, Y., Kim, H. W., & An, S. K. (2022). Design of a model to structure longitudinal data for medical education based on the I-E-O model. Korean Medical Education Review, 24(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.2022.24.2.156
- 정한나, 김한길, 이형진, 이상아, 안신기, 이영한. (2025). 연세대학교 의과대학 학습관리시스템 구축 사례 소개. 의학교육논단, 27(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.24.044
- Jung, H., Kim, H. G., Lee, H. J., Lee, S. A., An, S. K., & Lee, Y. H. (2025). Implementation of a learning management system at Yonsei University College of Medicine. Korean Medical Education Review, 27(1), 40–51. https://doi.org/10.17496/kmer.24.044
- Astin, A. W. (1991). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and evaluation in higher education. Macmillan.
- Ellaway, R. H., Pusic, M. V., Galbraith, R. M., & Cameron, T. (2014). Developing the role of big data and analytics in health professional education. Medical Teacher, 36(3), 216–222. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.874553
- Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015). Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. TechTrends, 59(1), 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0822-x
- Hafferty, F. W. (1998). Beyond curriculum reform: Confronting medicine’s hidden curriculum. Academic Medicine, 73(4), 403–407. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199804000-00013
- Kern, D. E., Thomas, P. A., Howard, D. M., & Bass, E. B. (1998). Curriculum development for medical education: A six-step approach. Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Park, J. H., Son, J. Y., & Kim, S. (2012). Experiences with establishing and implementing learning management system and computer-based test system in medical college. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 24(3), 213–222. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2012.24.3.213