J Educ Eval Health Prof.  2014;11:23. 10.3352/jeehp.2014.11.23.

Student feedback about the integrated curriculum in a Caribbean medical school

• Shankar PR
• Balasubramanium R
• Dwivedi NR
• Nuguri V

• KMID: 2380942
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2014.11.23

Abstract

PURPOSE
Xavier University School of Medicine adopted an integrated, organ system-based curriculum in January 2013. The present study was aimed at determining students' perceptions of the integrated curriculum and related assessment methods.
METHODS
The study was conducted on first- to fourth-semester undergraduate medical students during March 2014. The students were informed of the study and subsequently invited to participate. Focus group discussions were conducted. The curriculum's level of integration, different courses offered, teaching-learning methods employed, and the advantages and concerns relating to the curriculum were noted. The respondents also provided feedback about the assessment methods used. Deductive content analysis was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS
Twenty-two of the 68 students (32.2%) participated in the study. The respondents expressed generally positive opinions. They felt that the curriculum prepared them well for licensing examinations and future practice. Problem-based learning sessions encouraged active learning and group work among students, thus, improving their understanding of the course material. The respondents felt that certain subjects were allocated a larger proportion of time during the sessions, as well as more questions during the integrated assessment. They also expressed an appreciation for medical humanities, and felt that sessions on the appraisal of literature needed modification. Their opinions about assessment of behavior, attitudes, and professionalism varied.
CONCLUSION
Student opinion was positive, overall. Our findings would be of interest to other medical schools that have recently adopted an integrated curriculum or are in the process of doing so.

Keyword

Assessment; Caribbean region; Curriculum; Formative assessment; Integrated; Teaching-learning

MeSH Terms

Caribbean Region*
Curriculum*
Surveys and Questionnaires
Focus Groups
Humanities
Humans
Licensure
Problem-Based Learning
Schools, Medical*
Students, Medical
Netherlands

Reference

1. Ayuob NN, Eldeek BS, Alshawa LA, ALsaba AF. Interdisciplinary integration of the CVS module and its effect on faculty and student satisfaction as well as student performance. BMC Med Educ. 2012; 12:50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-12-50.

2. Shankar PR, Dubey A. ‘Modernizing’ the basic sciences MD program at XUSOM, Aruba. WebmedCentral Med Educ. 2013; 4:WMC004198. http://dx.doi.org/10.9754/journal.wmc.2013.004198.

3. Shankar PR, Bharti R, Ramireddy R, Balasubramanium R, Nuguri V. Students’ perception of the learning environment at Xavier University School of Medicine, Aruba: a follow-up study. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2014; 11:9. http://dx.doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2014.11.9.

4. Lam TP, Khoo US, Chan YS, Cheng YH, Lam KF. The first batch of graduates of a new medical curriculum in Asia: how their teachers see them. Med Educ. 2004; 38:980–986. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01910.x.

5. Thompson AR, Braun MW, O’Loughlin VD. A comparison of student performance on discipline-specific versus integrated exams in a medical school course. Adv Physiol Educ. 2013; 37:370–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/advan.00015.2013.

6. Wilkerson L, Wimmers P, Doyle LH, Uijtdehaage S. Two perspectives on the effects of a curriculum change: student experience and the United States medical licensing examination, step 1. Acad Med. 2007; 82(10 Suppl):S117–S120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/acm.0b013e318141f4f0.

7. Huang L, Cheng L, Cai Q, Kosik RO, Huang Y, Zhao X, Xu GT, Su TP, Chiu AW, Fan AP. Curriculum reform at Chinese medical schools: what have we learned? Med Teach. 2014; 36:1043–1050. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.918253.

8. Fan AP, Kosik RO, Tsai TC, Cai Q, Xu GT, Guo L, Su TP, Wang SJ, Chiu AW, Chen Q. A snapshot of the status of problem-based learning (PBL) in Chinese medical schools. Med Teach. 2014; 36:615–620. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.902045.

9. Watmough SD, O’Sullivan H, Taylor DC. Graduates from a reformed undergraduate medical curriculum based on Tomorrow’s Doctors evaluate the effectiveness of their curriculum 6 years after graduation through interviews. BMC Med Educ. 2010; 10:65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-10-65.

10. Shankar PR. Student feedback on an inaugural medical humanities module at XUSOM, Aruba. Educ Med J. 2013; 5:e12–e20. http://dx.doi.org/10.5959/eimj.v5i4.178.

11. Mullangi S. The synergy of medicine and art in the curriculum. Acad Med. 2013; 88:921–923. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182956017.

12. Inam SB. Experience of teaching critical appraisal of scientific literature to undergraduate and postgraduate students at the Ziauddin Medical University, Karachi, Pakistan. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2007; 1:119–124.

13. Beveridge AA. Encouraging general practitioners to train medical students. Med J Aust. 2008; 189:236.

14. Rauf A, Shamim MS, Aly SM, Chundrigar T, Alam SN. Formative assessment in undergraduate medical education: concept, implementation and hurdles. J Pak Med Assoc. 2014; 64:72–75.

15. Takiguchi Y, Arai K, Ieiri I, Uejima E, Hirata K. Development of evaluation methods for student performance in National Universities: formative assessment and portfolio. Yakugaku Zasshi. 2012; 132:365–368.