The pioneer cohort of curriculum reform: Guinea pigs or trail-blazers?

With curriculum reform, whether we admit it or not, the first cohort of students will be 'test-driving' the new programme. Not only are they the pioneers of a new curriculum, but as they progress through their studies, they experience each year of the innovation for the first time. As curriculum designers, we learn from their experiences and their feedback to improve the programme content and delivery, invariably for subsequent cohorts. A considerable onus therefore rests with this pioneer group, and their contribution to curriculum design, evaluation and programme revision should be valued

Learning to mark: a qualitative study of the experiences and concerns of medical markers

BACKGROUND: Although there is published research on the methods markers use in marking various types of assessment, there is relatively little information on the processes markers use in approaching a marking exercise. This qualitative paper describes the preparation and experiences of general practice (GP) teachers who undertake marking a written assessment in an undergraduate medical course. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven of the 16 GP tutors on an undergraduate course. The purposive sample comprised two new markers, two who had marked for a couple of years and three experienced markers. Each respondent was interviewed twice, once following a formative assessment of a written case study, and again after a summative assessment. All interviews were audio-taped and analysed for emerging themes. A respondent validation exercise was conducted with all 16 GP tutors. RESULTS: Markers had internal concerns about their ability to mark fairly and made considerable efforts to calibrate their marking. They needed guidance and coaching when marking for the first time and adopted a variety of marking styles, reaching a decision through a number of routes. Dealing with pass/fail borderline scripts and the consequences of the mark on the student were particular concerns. Even experienced markers felt the need to calibrate their marks both internally and externally CONCLUSION: Previous experience of marking appears to improve markers' confidence and is a factor in determining the role which markers adopt. Confidence can be improved by giving clear instructions, along with examples of marking. The authors propose that one method of providing this support and coaching could be by a process of peer review of a selection of papers prior to the main marking. New markers in particular would benefit from further guidance, however they are influenced by others early on in their marking career and course organisers should be mindful of this when arranging double marking

Does a PBL-based medical curriculum predispose training in specific career paths? A systematic review of the literature

Background North American medical schools have used problem-based learning (PBL) structured medical education for more than 60 years. However, it has only recently been introduced in other medical schools outside of North America. Since its inception, there has been the debate on whether the PBL learning process predisposes students to select certain career paths. Objectives To review available evidence to determine the predisposition of specific career paths when undertaking a PBL-based medical curriculum. The career path trajectory was determined as measured by official Matching Programs, self-reported questionnaires and surveys, and formally defined career development milestones. Methods A systematic literature review was performed. PubMed, Medline, Cochrane and ERIC databases were analysed in addition to reference lists for appropriate inclusion. Results Eleven studies fitting the inclusion criteria were identified. The majority of studies showed that PBL did not predispose a student to a career in a specific speciality (n = 7 out of 11 studies, 64%). However, three studies reported a significantly increased number of PBL graduates working in primary care compared to those from a non-PBL curriculum. Conclusions PBL has been shown not to predispose medical students to a career in General Practice or any other speciality. Furthermore, a greater number of similar studies are required before a definitive conclusion can be made in the future

Problem-based learning in dental education: what's the evidence for and against... and is it worth the effort?

The document attached has been archived with permission from the Australian Dental Association. An external link to the publisher’s copy is included.All Australian dental schools have introduced problem-based learning (PBL) approaches to their programmes over the past decade, although the nature of the innovations has varied from school to school. Before one can ask whether PBL is better than the conventional style of education, one needs to consider three key issues. Firstly, we need to agree on what is meant by the term PBL; secondly, we need to decide what “better” means when comparing educational approaches; and thirdly, we must look carefully at how PBL is implemented in given situations. It is argued that PBL fulfils, at least in theory, some important principles relating to the development of new knowledge. It also represents a change in focus from teachers and teaching in conventional programmes to learners and learning. Generally, students enjoy PBL programmes more than conventional programmes and feel they are more nurturing. There is also some evidence of an improvement in clinical and diagnostic reasoning ability associated with PBL curricula. The main negative points raised about PBL are the costs involved and mixed reports of insufficient grounding of students in the basic sciences. Financial restraints will probably preclude the introduction of pure or fully integrated PBL programmes in Australian dental schools. However, our research and experience, as well as other published literature, indicate that well-planned hybrid PBL programmes, with matching methods of assessment, can foster development of the types of knowledge, skills and attributes that oral health professionals will need in the future.T Winning and G Townsen

A hierarchy of effective teaching and learning to acquire competence in evidenced-based medicine

BACKGROUND: A variety of methods exists for teaching and learning evidence-based medicine (EBM). However, there is much debate about the effectiveness of various EBM teaching and learning activities, resulting in a lack of consensus as to what methods constitute the best educational practice. There is a need for a clear hierarchy of educational activities to effectively impart and acquire competence in EBM skills. This paper develops such a hierarchy based on current empirical and theoretical evidence. DISCUSSION: EBM requires that health care decisions be based on the best available valid and relevant evidence. To achieve this, teachers delivering EBM curricula need to inculcate amongst learners the skills to gain, assess, apply, integrate and communicate new knowledge in clinical decision-making. Empirical and theoretical evidence suggests that there is a hierarchy of teaching and learning activities in terms of their educational effectiveness: Level 1, interactive and clinically integrated activities; Level 2(a), interactive but classroom based activities; Level 2(b), didactic but clinically integrated activities; and Level 3, didactic, classroom or standalone teaching. SUMMARY: All health care professionals need to understand and implement the principles of EBM to improve care of their patients. Interactive and clinically integrated teaching and learning activities provide the basis for the best educational practice in this field

Successful accomplishment of educational goals with clinical experience at public primary care facilities

Goal: To compare the spectrum of clinical encounters experienced by medical students at the primary level of care in six urban public health units, and to determine the extent to which these educational experiences were sufficient to meet learning objectives proposed for a teaching module. Method: During the 4th year of a new six-year curriculum, 113 students cared for adults, the elderly, women and children. They were supervised by faculty and trained supervisors during three 4-hours periods a week, every other week, from January to October at six primary health units. Results: There were 7198 clinical encounters (2493 for adults, 2440 for women, and 2302 for children), during a total of 37 periods, averaging 1.8 cases/student per period. The top five primary diagnoses, similar at all primary health units, included: for adults-hypertension, diabetes, upper respiratory diseases, anxiety/depression, and obesity; for children-first-year follow up, upper respiratory diseases, dermatological, and infectious diseases; for women-antenatal care, vaginal discharge, cervical cancer screening, climacteric symptoms/menstrual disorders, and family planning. Conclusions: Students were exposed to and cared for the most common conditions observed at the primary level of care, with a sufficient homogeneous clinical spectrum among six primary health units, meeting essential learning objectives related to ambulatory care.29660060