Use of Students’ Learning Outcomes as a Tool for Changing Teaching Content and Methodology: Assessment of Impact

Syed Shariq Naeem, V. Roy
{"title":"Use of Students’ Learning Outcomes as a Tool for Changing Teaching Content and Methodology: Assessment of Impact","authors":"Syed Shariq Naeem, V. Roy","doi":"10.4103/mamcjms.mamcjms_116_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: Assessment of student’s learning outcomes in alignment with the teaching goals can be a tool for modification of curriculum and teaching methods. This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of a pharmacology curriculum on students’ learning outcomes and the use of their assessment as a tool for making curriculum changes. Materials and methods: An assessment of the students’ (exiting 2014) knowledge and skills at the end of their fifth semester training in pharmacology was carried out using a questionnaire that was developed to accommodate testing of all areas which are underlined in the Medical Council of India’s goals and objectives of teaching pharmacology to MBBS undergraduates at the time of designing of the study. Areas where lesser than 50% students scored well were identified for educational interventions with the next two batches of students (2015, batch B and 2016, batch C), who were then subjected to the same assessment. Results: Based on the learning outcomes, 15 areas were identified for educational interventions with batch 2015. Improvement in learning outcomes of students was observed in 10, ranging from 10% to 15% in batch 2015, whereas in batch 2016, an improvement of 20% was observed in three questions and >10% was observed in six questions. Overall improvement in the intervention questions was 60% (+9 questions) in batch 2015 and 80% (+12 questions) in batch 2016 when compared with preintervention batch 2014. The preintervention batch 2014 scored better overall than the intervention batches 2015 and 2016. Conclusions: Changing teaching content and method, based on assessment of students’ learning outcomes alone, may not translate into an improvement in students’ learning outcomes. Teachers must look for other factors that can impact students’ learning.","PeriodicalId":32900,"journal":{"name":"MAMC Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MAMC Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/mamcjms.mamcjms_116_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Assessment of student’s learning outcomes in alignment with the teaching goals can be a tool for modification of curriculum and teaching methods. This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of a pharmacology curriculum on students’ learning outcomes and the use of their assessment as a tool for making curriculum changes. Materials and methods: An assessment of the students’ (exiting 2014) knowledge and skills at the end of their fifth semester training in pharmacology was carried out using a questionnaire that was developed to accommodate testing of all areas which are underlined in the Medical Council of India’s goals and objectives of teaching pharmacology to MBBS undergraduates at the time of designing of the study. Areas where lesser than 50% students scored well were identified for educational interventions with the next two batches of students (2015, batch B and 2016, batch C), who were then subjected to the same assessment. Results: Based on the learning outcomes, 15 areas were identified for educational interventions with batch 2015. Improvement in learning outcomes of students was observed in 10, ranging from 10% to 15% in batch 2015, whereas in batch 2016, an improvement of 20% was observed in three questions and >10% was observed in six questions. Overall improvement in the intervention questions was 60% (+9 questions) in batch 2015 and 80% (+12 questions) in batch 2016 when compared with preintervention batch 2014. The preintervention batch 2014 scored better overall than the intervention batches 2015 and 2016. Conclusions: Changing teaching content and method, based on assessment of students’ learning outcomes alone, may not translate into an improvement in students’ learning outcomes. Teachers must look for other factors that can impact students’ learning.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
利用学生的学习成果作为改变教学内容和方法的工具:影响评估
目标:根据教学目标评估学生的学习成果可以成为修改课程和教学方法的工具。本研究旨在评估药理学课程对学生学习成果的影响,以及将其评估作为课程改革的工具。材料和方法:在第五学期药理学培训结束时,使用问卷对学生(2014年毕业)的知识和技能进行了评估,该问卷旨在适应印度医学委员会在设计时向MBBS本科生教授药理学的目标和目的中强调的所有领域的测试研究。在接下来的两批学生(2015年B批和2016年C批)中,确定了得分低于50%的地区进行教育干预,然后对他们进行相同的评估。结果:根据学习结果,确定了2015年批次的15个教育干预领域。学生的学习成绩在10个问题中得到了改善,在2015年批次中从10%到15%不等,而在2016年批次中,在3个问题中观察到了20%的改善,在6个问题中发现了>10%的改善。与干预前的2014批次相比,2015批次干预问题的总体改善率为60%(+9个问题),2016批次干预问题改善率为80%(+12个问题)。干预前批次2014的总体得分高于干预前批次2015和2016。结论:仅仅基于对学生学习成果的评估来改变教学内容和方法,可能不会转化为对学生学习结果的改善。教师必须寻找能够影响学生学习的其他因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
The clinical, sociodemographic, and pharmacotherapeutic characteristics influencing quality of life in patients with epilepsy Should planning of cervical pedicle screws be race specific? Computed tomography–based morphometric analysis A Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction in Infants and Children A randomized controlled study to compare the dose requirement of oxytocin for management of uterine atony in patients receiving prophylactic phenylephrine during caesarean delivery Artificial intelligence and healthcare
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1