12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Matching medical student achievement to learning objectives and outcomes: a paradigm shift for an implemented teaching module

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Low student achievement in a basic imaging module was the impetus for an assessment of the module.

          Methods

          A valid, reliable, and structured Likert scale was designed to measure the degree of student satisfaction with the domains of the module, including learning objectives (LO), teaching strategy and tools (TT), assessment tools (AT), and allotted credit hours (CH). Further analysis was conducted of student dissatisfaction to determine the subdomain in which module improvement was to be implemented. Statistical analysis of data among Likert scale domains was conducted.

          Results

          Likert scale data showed the TT domain to be the major reason for low student achievement. Statistical studies revealed 57/117 students (48.6%) were dissatisfied with TT, compared with LO 16/117 (13.6%), AT 54/117 (46.1%), and CH 12/117 (10.2%). Significant P-values were obtained for LO vs TT ( P<0.0001), LO vs AT ( P<0.0001), LO vs CH ( P<0.03), TT vs CH ( P<0.0001), and AT vs CH ( P<0.0001). No significant difference was observed between TT and AT ( P<0.29). Regarding TT, 41/117 (34.9%) students were dissatisfied with lectures (L) compared to hospital-based teaching (HPT) 24/117 (20%), problem-based learning (PBL) 8/117 (6.8%), self-directed learning (SDL) 3/117 (2.5%), and seminars (S) 4/117 (3.4%). Significant P-values were obtained for L vs HPT ( P<0.0001), L vs PBL ( P<0.0001), L vs SDL ( P<0.0001), L vs S ( P<0.0001), HPT vs PBL ( P<0.002), HPT vs SDL ( P<0.0001), and HPT vs S ( P<0.0001). Regarding lecture modifications, student satisfaction was 78.3% compared to 52% before modification. A significant P-value ( P<0.0001) was obtained between Likert scale domains before and after modification. Lecture modification resulted in a good student response and satisfaction.

          Conclusion

          The major reason for low student achievement was the teaching tools, particularly the lectures. Major modifications to lectures improved student achievement. The students and most of the teaching staff were highly satisfied with the modifications, which provided for reciprocal discussion and interaction. These results should encourage and guide other medical schools to investigate the points of weakness in their curriculum.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Selecting, designing, and developing your questionnaire.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Teaching under the new Taylorism: high‐stakes testing and the standardization of the 21stcentury curriculum

            Wayne Au (2011)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Preclinical medical student training in radiology: the effect of early exposure.

              The purpose of this study was to determine whether an integrated radiology curriculum in the first year of medical school changes medical students' attitudes toward radiology or affects their knowledge of radiologic principles. The first-year medical curriculum of a medical school was revised between the 2003 and 2004 academic years to introduce more didactic radiology teaching. Dedicated radiology lectures were introduced, and radiology consult sessions became integral to problem-based learning sessions. A survey was administered between the first and second years of training to assess first-year medical students' attitudes toward radiology and their knowledge of basic radiologic principles. Students who had undertaken the revised curriculum (class of 2008) were compared with students who had undertaken the traditional curriculum (class of 2007). Survey responses were compared with Mann-Whitney rank sum tests. Students exposed to the new curriculum stated that they were more familiar with radiology as a specialty and believed that radiology had greater importance to the overall practice of medicine. They stated that they were more likely to select radiology as a clinical elective, and more of them were considering radiology as a career option. The students who had been exposed to radiology performed better on the test of basic radiologic knowledge. All results were statistically significant. Exposing students to radiology in the first year of medical school improves their impression of radiology as a specialty and increases their interest in radiology as a career. Follow-up surveys will determine whether this effect persists through the clinical years of training and improves the overall impression of radiology within the medical community.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Adv Med Educ Pract
                Adv Med Educ Pract
                Advances in Medical Education and Practice
                Advances in Medical Education and Practice
                Dove Medical Press
                1179-7258
                2018
                09 April 2018
                : 9
                : 227-233
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (Assuit Branch), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
                [2 ]Radiology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Albaha University, Al-Aqiq, Saudi Arabia
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Ihab Shafek Atta, Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (Assuit Branch), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt, Tel +20 10 0155 6079, Email attaihab2@ 123456gmail.com
                Fahd Nasser AlQahtani, Radiology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Albaha University, Al-Aqiq, Saudi Arabia, Tel +966 5 0665 1017, Email fnq900@ 123456yahoo.com
                Article
                amep-9-227
                10.2147/AMEP.S158784
                5898594
                29670415
                56af11a2-6be5-4583-873b-e54cfe709493
                © 2018 Atta and AlQahtani. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                History
                Categories
                Original Research

                teaching strategy,teaching tools,learning objectives,interactive lecture,student performance,radiology teaching,curriculum reform,curriculum evaluation,radiology lecture

                Comments

                Comment on this article