186 Indian J. Anaesth. 2002; 46 (3) : 186-188
INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, JUNE 2002 186
EDUCATION FORUM
UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS ASSESSMENT OF TEACHING CURRICULUM – A CROSS SECTIONAL STUDY. Dr. A. Tyagi1 Dr. S. Ahuja2 Prof. A. Bhattacharya 3 SUMMARY A student’s analyses of what he has been taught would probably serve as an acid test for even the most seasoned teacher and his meticulously drawn curriculum. Search of literature however failed to reveal any such attempt in anaesthesiology and critical care. For undergraduate medical students, in consensus with the earlier curriculum drawn by our college academic committee, a 15 days posting in department of anaesthesiology and critical care during third year of M.B.B.S. was scheduled. To judge the utility of this educational endeavour from the student’s viewpoint, we designed a pertinent and simple questionnaire. At the end of the posting, all students filled this questionnaire and 100 of these belonging to a single batch have been evaluated by us. While 99% students responded that the topics were interesting. Only 67% found the practical demonstrations were adequate. 97% of students agreed that the posting provided them an insight into the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care but 56% found the duration of posting inadequate. The three top ranking topics of interest in decreasing order included cardiopulmonary brain resuscitation (93%), airway maintenance along with endotracheal intubations (56%) and central neuraxial blocks (35%). All the three were topics that included practical demonstrations along with theory sessions. Not surprisingly the three commonest suggestions included prolonging the time duration as well as practical demonstrations (33% students for each) and more opportunity for “hands on” practice of appropriate skills (24% students).
Keywords : Medical education, Curriculum, Student feedback Introduction Student’s evaluation of any teaching curriculum is a firmly recommended part of the teaching-learning process and is aimed at achieving the desired objectives1. The concept of “adult learner” in the teaching–learning process further authenticates the utility of a feedback from students to evaluate teaching curriculum. However, it also has to be remembered that such an exercise is useful only if the students evaluation is analysed and implemented to further overcome the shortcomings of teaching curriculum. The subject of anaesthesiology and critical care as a speciality has not received its due credit and importance for undergraduate medical education. We have tried to evaluate our teaching curriculum of third year undergraduate 1. MBBS, MD, DNB (Lecturer) 2. MBBS, MD, DA (Professor) 3. MBBS, MD, DA, D. Acu. (Professor and Head) Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care, University College of Medical Sciences and Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Shahdara, Delhi, India. Correspond to : Dr. Asha Tyagi, 103, Siddhartha Enclave, Ashram, New Delhi-110014, India. E-mail:
[email protected] Telephone No’s.: 6838438, 6316227
students in the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care by designing a feedback evaluation. Materials and Methods As per the earlier curriculum drafted by the academic committee of our college, third year undergraduate students were posted in department of anaesthesiology and critical care for a period of 15 days. All academic sessions were conducted by consultants in anaesthesiology and critical care, during a three hour posting everyday. During this period, the objectives of curriculum were to help the students attain a basic knowledge of the subject, learn the relevant theory and practical skills of life saving procedures including airway maintenance, artificial ventilation, establishing an intravenous access and fluid therapy and oxygen therapy. The students were made to practice the cardiopulmonary and brain resuscitation including endotracheal intubations, on mannequins. At the end of allotted period of 15 days, assessment of students in the form of a viva-voce as well as multiple choice question examination was carried out. To judge the utility of this educational posting from the student’s point of view, we designed a relevant and simple questionnaire
TYAGI, AHUJA, BHATTACHARYA : ASSESSMENT OF UG CURRICULUM
(annexure1). All students were made to answer this questionnaire for an unbiased and anonymous feedback. For this study, we analysed 100 of these questionnaires belonging to a single batch of third year undergraduate students. Results The analyses revealed the following results: Question 1. Were the topics covered during the period interesting? Answer
99% students found the topics covered during the posting interesting.
Question 2. Did the topics give an insight into the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care? Answer
An overwhelming majority of students (97%) agreed that the curriculum had provided an insight into the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care.
Question 3. Was the period allotted for anaesthesia posting adequate? Answer
With two students choosing not to answer the question, 56% students found the period inadequate.
Question 4. Were the practical demonstrations adequate? Answer
Again, two students did not answer the above question and although majority (67%) agreed that the practical demonstrations formed an adequate part of the curriculum, a large number (33%) considered the need for greater number of practical demonstrations.
Question 5. State some of the topics of special interest to you. Answer
No limitation in enumerating the number of topics of special interest had been imposed. Consequently, the answers varied from listing two to several topics. The three commonest topics which were listed in decreasing order of preference were-cardiopulmonary and brain resuscitation (93%), airway maintenance along with endotracheal intubations (56%) and central neuraxial block (35%).
Question 6. Any suggestion to improve/alter the curriculum Answer
While 20% did not respond to the question, the three commonest suggestions were to increase the duration of posting (33 responses),
187
raise the number of practical demonstrations (another 33 students) and 24 students wanted greater “hands on experience”. Discussion Evaluation of teaching curriculum by students appears extremely logical and is firmly recommended as a part of teaching learning process1. Attempts at such an evaluation have been made by a few authors2,3 but search of literature did not reveal any such attempt in the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care. Evaluation of a curriculum may lead to much desired changes in the objectives, course contents or teaching methods. One student stated that the topics discussed were not interesting. But the same student has listed three individual interesting topics in the subsequent question number 5. So one is forced to consider it as an accidental error in ticking the right choice Majority of students agreed that practical demonstrations were adequate in number. It is interesting to note that the three commonest topics of special interest listed by the students- CPBR, airway maintenance with endotracheal intubations and central neuraxial blocks are practically demonstrated topics along with relevant theory discussion. Of these, CPBR and endotracheal intubations were practiced by the students on mannequins also. This indicates the greater satisfaction and interest generated by practical demonstrations rather than theory lectures. This is further authenticated by the suggestion of students (33%) to increase the number of practical demonstration and provide greater hands on experience (24%). Although the speciality of anaesthesiology and critical care is not given its due credit at undergraduate medical level, from a students perspective it is an interesting and beneficial posting with two students voluntarily writing that it was the “best subject posting” they had ever attended. This is further enforced by the finding that 56% students stated the posting period to be inadequate and 33% suggested the duration be increased. Keeping in mind this feedback we received, it is probably for the better that now as per the new guidelines, undergraduate students are posted in the speciality of anaesthesiology and critical care for a longer period. They are allotted this time at three different levels-15 days each in anaesthesia and critical care during third year and then a repeat exposure of the same duration during final year
188
INDIAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, JUNE 2002
MBBS. This gives us a better opportunity to be able to train them and continue our attempts at such evaluation of teaching curriculum. For this we have now further upgraded our questionnaire with a view for improvement in teaching learning process leading to better patient care.
Annexure 1 1. Whether the topics covered during the posting were interesting?
References
3.
1. Srinivasa DK, Curriculum planning, In: Medical Education: Principles and Practice; Consulting editor: Srinivasa DK. 1995, 165-171. 2. Masrh H W. A Reliable, Valid and Useful Instrument for Collecting Student’s Evaluations of University Teaching. Br J Edu Psycho 1982; 52; 77-95 3. Singh A, Kumar A K. Assessing Instructional Effectiveness. University News 1995; 18; 1-3
2.
4.
Yes/No
Whether the practical demonstrations were adequate?
Yes/No
Did the topics give an insight into the subject of anaesthesiology and critical care?
Yes/No
Whether the period allotted for the posting was adequate?
Yes/No
5.
State some of the topics that were of special interest to you.
6.
Any suggestion for improvement/ alteration in the curriculum.
ESSAY COMPETITION ISA GOLD CON – 2002 – Education Program Educational Program Essay Competition :
Essays are invited from members of the ISA, age of 40 years or less, for the award of first, second and third prizes (provided sponsors for the awards are available). The topic of the essay will be : “OUTCOME ORIENTED PERIOPERATIVE CARE” 1)
The essay should not exceed 10 - 12 pages on A4 paper, single line spacing with 1” margin on top, bottom, left and right (4-5 tables and 4-5 figures excluded). The article should follow the general format that has been accepted by the Indian Journal of Anaesthesia vide : Indian. J. Anaesth. 2002;46(1): 66-69.
2)
The title page of the essay will not carry the name and address of the authors. A separate name and address slip should be enclosed.
3)
Four copies of the manuscript should reach Dr. A. Lal, Department of Anaesthesia, IMS, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi – 221005 on or before 30th November, 2002.
4)
The prize winning article will be published in the Indian Journal of Anaesthesia in 2003 and so the authors of the essays will enclose a written consent to that effect and a soft copy of their article along with the manuscript of the essay .
