/ 7. .

Yurtsenyuk O.S.

Higher education institution in Ukraine Bukovinian State Medical University


Culture is an intricate concept with many different classification. Simply put , Culture refers to group or community with which we share common experiences that shape the way be understand the world. If we can define the very nomenclature of culture, the very first thought that occurs to our mind is that, Culture is a composite entity which exceeds all parameters of civilization and hence it is the total entity of human growth which is never confined to time, place, nationality and even history too. Culture is a state of consciousness individually and collectively which can make men free from animality, physicality and vitality which are the primary stages of human evolution.

India as we all know is a multicultural democratic nation believing in Unity is Diversity. But not everyone is comfortable when it comes to getting acquainted in a different culture than theirs. It is human mentality which many a times is not open to multicultural environment and that leads to a reserved society of knowledge which is distributed culturally.

Communication that too effective one is a major challenge and a huge hurdle that one comes across when working with people of different cultures in an educational establishment. The effective or lack of communication as a result of cultural diversity leads to misunderstood concepts, confusion among information giver-gainer and vice versa, low morale and thus leading o substandard knowledge.

Each of us is shaped by many factors and culture is one of the powerful forces that influences our lives. It is upon us how we break the barrier of communication in multicultural learning environment.

As part of the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS), a multi-year, multi-site study to explain variations in patient outcomes, RAND developed the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). SF-36 is a set of generic, coherent, and easily administered quality-of-life measures. These measures rely upon patient self-reporting and are now widely utilized by managed care organizations and by Medicare for routine monitoring and assessment of care outcomes in adult patients.

The RAND 36-Item Health Survey (Version 1.0) taps eight health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, role limitations due to physical health problems, role limitations due to personal or emotional problems, emotional well-being, social functioning, energy/fatigue, and general health perceptions. It also includes a single item that provides an indication of perceived change in health. These 36 items, presented here, are identical to the MOS SF-36 described in Ware and Sherbourne (1992). They were adapted from longer instruments completed by patients participating in the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS), an observational study of variations in physician practice styles and patient outcomes in different systems of health care delivery (Hays & Shapiro, 1992; Stewart, Sherbourne, Hays, et al., 1992). A revised version of the RAND 36-Item Health Survey (Version 1.1) that differs sightly from Version 1.0 in terms of item wording is currently in development.

Procedure for the MOS SF-36 has been distributed by the International Resource Center for Health Care Assessment (located in Boston, MA). The scoring method described here persons using this scoring method should refer to the instrument as RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0.

Scoring the RAND 36-Item Health Survey is a two-step process. First, precoded numeric values are recoded per the scoring key given in Table 1. Note that all items are scored so that a high score defines a more favorable health state. In addition, each item is scored on a 0 to 100 range so that the lowest and highest possible scores are 0 and 100, respectively. Scores represent the percentage of total possible score achieved. In step 2, items in the same scale are averaged together to create the 8 scale scores. Table 2 lists the items averaged together to create each scale. Items that are left blank (missing data) are not taken into account when calculating the scale scores. Hence, scale scores represent the average for all items in the scale that the respondent answered.

It is established that the quality of students life mainly depend on the course of learning, , among the 1-2 courses students the average level of life quality was 26,56+6.34 points, while on the 4-5 courses was 51,94+4.10 points.

Analyzing the indicators of the life quality in the sexual distribution can be stated about the lower results in the women for all indicators than the men, which is probably due to the personal characteristics women's perceptions of the social problems, a tendency towards the dramatization and unstable hormonal background. So the absolute performance physical functioning in the women compared with the men was 34,72+4.90 points 41,91+5.50 points respectively.

The established results point to the problem of adaptation among the foreign students that must be considered when creating the training and the psycho-correction programs for this cohort of students.