|
|
ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
Year : 2017 | Volume
: 3
| Issue : 1 | Page : 17-20 |
|
Evaluation of educational quality of pediatrics course 2 at the College of Medicine, King Khalid University by students
Karimeldin M. A. Salih1, Mohamed Abdullah Al-Gossadi Alshehri2, Omer Abdelgadir Elfeki3
1 Department of Child Health, King Khalid University, Abha; Department of Medical Education, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2 Department of Child Health, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 3 Department of Medical Education, King Khalid University, Abha; Department of Internal Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Date of Web Publication | 16-Jan-2017 |
Correspondence Address: Dr. Karimeldin M. A. Salih Department of Child Health, College of Medicine, King Khalid University, Abha Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/2395-2296.198416
Aim: The purpose of this study is to determine the factors that could improve pediatrics teaching and outcomes from student feedback. Methods: King Khalid University (KKU) is one of the pioneer universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which adopt traditional curriculum. Students who finished pediatrics 2 MBBS course were kindly requested to answer a well-structured 21 validated questions regarding the course in June 2015. SPSS version 22 (IBM) software was used for analysis; Chi-square test was applied to measure the significant differences among the responses; and the level of significance was 0.05, which means P < 0.05 shall be considered a significant defense. Results: Most of the students viewed the course as valuable, understood and viewed instructors as dynamic, energetic, enhanced presentations, enhanced discussion, friendly, made students feel welcome in seeking help/advice in or outside of class, accessible to students, and discussed current developments in the field. Examinations tested course content as emphasized by the instructor, with available facilities for the course and homework. On the other hand, a significant number of students think the course does not increase their interest in the subject, no clear explanation, proposed objectives inconsistent with actually taught. Students were encouraged to ask and to express themselves and students evaluation unfair. Conclusion: Students feedback gives good reflections regarding limitations of the traditional curriculum, gives recommendations to improvement. Keywords: Assessment, evaluation, feedback, pediatrics, teaching, test
How to cite this article: Salih KM, Al-Gossadi Alshehri MA, Elfeki OA. Evaluation of educational quality of pediatrics course 2 at the College of Medicine, King Khalid University by students. Int J Educ Psychol Res 2017;3:17-20 |
How to cite this URL: Salih KM, Al-Gossadi Alshehri MA, Elfeki OA. Evaluation of educational quality of pediatrics course 2 at the College of Medicine, King Khalid University by students. Int J Educ Psychol Res [serial online] 2017 [cited 2024 Mar 29];3:17-20. Available from: https://www.ijeprjournal.org/text.asp?2017/3/1/17/198416 |
Introduction | | |
Since students are very important partners and stakeholders in high education, the importance of their input, feedback, and reflections cannot be overemphasized. Sounded and fair students opinion regarding teaching and the course will add values, improvement, assurance, and step toward provision of a good-quality doctor. The advantage of feedback from students is its effectiveness and needs no sophisticated tools or time-consuming.[1],[2],[3],[4],[5] In many studies regarding student feedbacks, it was proved that beyond doubt motivations to the student, using many strategies in addition to exposure to certain medical field, it leads to student commitments, improves health services as well as patient safety.[6] Feedback and many factors were suggested to determine student or residents career such as educational level, income, mentoring, and other factors; however, so far no single factor is solely responsible.[7],[8],[9]
Methods | | |
King Khalid University (KKU) is one of the pioneer universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, curriculum adopted in KKU is the traditional one. Pediatrics 2 course is a clinical course, where some authorities feel clinical session will easily convey knowledge as well as skill domains to the learners.[10] The pediatrics 2 course is taught throughout 8 weeks, through level 11, where assessment followed by MBBS. Pediatrics 2 is a clinical course with (2 + 4 credit hour), mainly clinical pediatrics with seminars, bedside teaching, case presentation, and cases report. In bedside teaching, every 15 students are usually supervised by one tutor. Seminars and case presentation will be usually presented to the whole class while case reports each student is to write and clark case from ER and to submit it to the tutors. Assessment is continuous by giving each five marks for BST, seminars, case presentation, case report, multiple choice questions 15 marks, 10 marks for OSPE, and 5 marks for problem cases that make a sum of 50 marks as continuous assessment. Fifty marks are allocated to the final clinical examination which is run in hospital. The final workplace examination consists of two short modified cases by two assessors.
Students who finished pediatrics 2 courses were kindly requested to answered a well-structured 21 validated question regarding the course. Forty-eight male students doing their final MBBS in pediatrics, June 2015, were enrolled in this study. No names or students ID mentioned, each student answered the questionnaire at the end of the course by himself only, then analysis by SPPS version 22. Out of 50 students in their final years, 48 (96%) of them responded and all questions were answered adequately. A link was sent to the students, to identify their response regarding the evaluation of pediatrics 2 course. The questionnaire were selected from relevant literature, well validated and structured; however, a pilot study was done before applying it to the whole group. SPSS version 22 was used for analysis, Chi-square test was applied to measure the significant differences among the responses of the questions, and the level of significance was 0.05, which means P < 0.05 shall be considered a significant defense.
Results | | |
There was a significant difference between students who find the course is valuable, with P < 0.005 [Table 1]. There is no significant difference between the students who agree to the statement of increased interest in the subject and those who do not. Those who understand the course and find the instructors are dynamic in conducting the course has a significant difference from those who do not agree with P > 0.005 [Table 1]. Significant differences between student who finds the instructors explanation were clear with clear presentation and explanation and those who do not agree with P > 0.005 [Table 1]. Many students viewed instructors enhanced presentations with the use of humor, encouragement to participate in class discussions, instructors were friendly toward individual students, instructors made students feel welcome in seeking help/advice in or outside of class, instructors had a genuine interest in individual students, instructors were adequately accessible to students during office hours or after class, and instructors adequately discussed current developments in the field. Examinations tested course content as emphasized by the instructor, required readings/texts were valuable, readings, homework, contributed to appreciation and understanding of subject, compared with other courses, I have had at the KKU I would say this course is good and compared with other instructors I have had at the KKU I would say these instructors are generally good with P > 0.005 [Table 1]. Many students viewed proposed objectives not agreed with those actually taught, so I knew where the course was going, students were not encouraged to ask questions and were given meaningful answers, students were not encouraged to express their own ideas and/or question the instructor, and methods of evaluating student work were not fair and appropriate with P > 0.05.
Discussion | | |
It is obviously student agree about the learned material which is considered valuable and well understood. The students viewed instructors as dynamic, energetic, enhanced presentations with the use of humor, encouraging student participation, friendly with students, welcoming student question, they discussed current development in the field, and accessible to them. The learners agree that the reading material for the course is available, examination questions are aligned to the course content, the course and coordinators are one of the best comparing to other courses. However, students not considered their interest in the subject has increased as a consequence of this course, instructors explanations were unclear, proposed objectives not agreed with those actually taught, so I knew where the course was going. Students were neither encouraged to ask questions and were given meaningful answers, nor encouraged to express their own ideas and/or question the instructor and there are not convicted methods of evaluating student work were fair and appropriate. Our findings regarding the decrease of interest of the students toward the course are not in agreement with other national studies done in King Saud University (KSU) done by Alangari. The difference could well be attributed to the methodology used by King Saud University (KSU) that used tutorial sessions, problem-based and small group teaching. Actually increasing the interest in the course or subject, will ultimately provide good practitioner, efficient doctors, and good patient care.[11],[12] Career selection is affected by many factors including the curriculum type and personal motivation and interest.[13] The message for the disagreement in this aspect with others, call for urgent reforms in our curriculum. The students are not happy with methods of evaluation, nor did proposed objectives agreed with those actually teach, a finding that is computable with Kemeir study.[14] Both studies were done in KKU but for different courses, anatomy and pediatrics. Alignments of objectives to methodology of teaching and assessment should be reviewed. Encouragement to ask questions by students with self-expression to their own ideas was not an agreement among them. It is a well-known traditional curriculum, will not offer a full chance for students to express themselves, to communicate well with each other, to interact with their colleagues and facilitators.[15] Always feedback will lead to some improvement and breakthrough,[16] as shown in this study. It is good to see some positive points regarding instructors, but further improvement should be considered and explored.
Conclusion | | |
Student feedback gives good reflections regarding limitations of the traditional curriculum, gives recommendations to improvement.
Recommendations
curriculum reform, alignments of course objectives with instruction methodology, and assessment, moving toward the small group and student-dependent learning.
Strength
To my knowledge, this is the first study to be done in KKU, addressing very important issues regarding curriculum reform.
Limitations
The limitations of the study are small size.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
References | | |
1. | Stillman PL, Gillers MA, Heins M, Nicholson G, Sabers DL. Effect of immediate student evaluations on a multi-instructor course. J Med Educ 1983;58:172-8. |
2. | Lancaster CJ, Mendelson MA, Ross GR. The utilization of student instructional ratings in medical colleges. J Med Educ 1979;54:657-9. |
3. | Irby DM, Shannon NF, Scher M, Peckham P, Ko G, Davis E. The use of student ratings in multiinstructor courses. J Med Educ 1977;52:668-73. |
4. | Bhosale UA, Yegnanarayan R, Yadav GE. Attitude, perception and feedback of second year medical students on teaching-learning methodology and evaluation methods in pharmacology: A questionnaire-based study. Niger Med J 2013;54:33-9. [ PUBMED] |
5. | Maxwell S, Walley T; BPS Clinical Section Committee. Teaching safe and effective prescribing in UK medical schools: A core curriculum for tomorrow′s doctors. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2003;55:496-503. |
6. | Ko HH, Lee TK, Leung Y, Fleming B, Vikis E, Yoshida EM. Factors influencing career choices made by medical students, residents, and practising physicians. BC Med J 2007;49:482-9. |
7. | Jordan J, Brown JB, Russell G. Choosing family medicine. What influences medical students? Can Fam Physician 2003;49:1131-7. |
8. | Newton DA, Grayson MS, Whitley TW. What predicts medical student career choice? J Gen Intern Med 1998;13:200-3. |
9. | Wright S, Wong A, Newill C. The impact of role models on medical students. J Gen Intern Med 1997;12:53-6. |
10. | Abdullah A. Students′ perception of the pediatrics course in a Saudi Medical School. J Taibah Univ Med Sci 2008;3:135-9. |
11. | Karaoğlu L, Çelebi E, Pehlivan E. Nursing, midwifery and health officer programs undergraduate students′ attitudes towards their future career: Motivating/demotivating professional characteristics and career preferences. J Inonu Univ Med Fac 2007;14:219-25. |
12. | Hadadgar A, Yousefy A, Sabouri M, Richard G. Psychometric properties of a persian version of the specialty indecision scale: A preliminary study. Iran J Med Educ 2008;8:229-37. |
13. | Ko HH, Lee TK, Leung Y, Fleming B, Vikis E, Yoshida EM. Factors influencing career choices made by medical students, residents, and practising physicians. BC Med J 2007;49:482-9. |
14. | Kemeir MA. Attitudes and views of medical students toward anatomy learnt in the preclinical phase at King Khalid University. J Family Community Med 2012;19:190-3. |
15. | Al-Damegh SA, Baig LA. Comparison of an integrated problem-based learning curriculum with the traditional discipline-based curriculum in KSA. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2005;15:605-8. |
16. | Badyal DK, Bala S, Kathuria P. Student evaluation of teaching and assessment methods in pharmacology. Indian J Pharmacol 2010;42:87-9. [ PUBMED] |
[Table 1]
|