Assessment of the core learning objectives curriculum for the urology clerkship

Musculoskeletal Radiology Teaching at a UK Medical School: Do We Need to Improve?

The United Kingdom is currently facing crisis due to a shortage of radiology consultants despite ever-increasing demand for medical imaging. The specifics of how best to teach radiology has generated increasing interest. This study aims to determine whether musculoskeletal (MSK) radiology teaching at the University of Nottingham (UoN) Medical School is perceived to be satisfactory by medical students, Foundation-Year doctors, and senior medical professionals in preparing students for the demands working as Foundation-Year doctors. Questionnaires were distributed to all medical students and Foundation-Year doctors that graduated from UoN (n = 307). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with consultants and teaching staff (n = 13). Forty-nine percent of preclinical medical students, 43% of clinical students and 27% of Foundation-Year doctors thought MSK radiology teaching was not sufficient in preparing them for the radiology challenges Foundation-Year doctors' face. This difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The consensus from senior medical professionals was that MSK Radiology teaching is currently adequate and producing competent students. Interestingly, only 5% of students were considering a career in radiology compared to 34% of Foundation-Year doctors. Overall, there seems to be concern among students regarding MSK radiology teaching and students have a lack of confidence with MSK radiology. Foundation-Year doctors and senior medical professionals do not share this view. This may be due to medical students' lack of clarity on what is required of them. Formal documentation of set learning objectives for MSK radiology throughout the curriculum may address this.

Design, implementation and evaluation of a new core learning objectives curriculum for a urology clerkship

PURPOSE

Until recently, medical students at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health participated in a traditional 2-week urology clerkship. We hypothesized that a new curriculum with core learning objectives and student oriented didactic sessions would increase learning and satisfaction compared to a traditional clerkship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between July 2008 and June 2009, 55 medical students completed the urology clerkship following the traditional curriculum. Between July 2009 and June 2010, 51 students followed the core learning objectives curriculum. We compared the curriculum outcomes using objective and subjective measures. Overall student participation was 90%, with 95 of 106 students completing both assessment tools.

RESULTS

The objective scores of the students following the core learning objectives were higher than those of the students following the traditional curriculum. The t test to evaluate the difference between the 2 curricula was statistically significant (t = 2.845, df = 93, p <0.05). Subjective scores for the core learning objectives group were lower in all but 1 category. Student perception of knowledge attainment for the core learning objectives cohort was higher than that of the traditional cohort, but none of the subjective scores was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that a core learning objectives curriculum was associated with higher objective test scores compared to a traditional model, suggesting that the core learning objectives curriculum increased student learning compared to the traditional curriculum. However, the core learning objectives cohort did not show greater satisfaction than students following the traditional curriculum.

Students' and teachers' perceptions of clinical assessment program: A qualitative study in a PBL curriculum

BACKGROUND

"Examinations drive students' learning." This statement refers to what is assumed to be one of the strongest relationships in education. We explored in this research how and why students differ in their approaches to learning, how assessment affects deep learning, and which barriers stand in the way of good assessment and learning in the clinical years of a Problem Based Learning (PBL) graduate entry medical curriculum.

FINDINGS

METHOD

We conducted a qualitative, phenomenological study using semi-structured group interviews with students and semi-structured individual interviews with teachers and students. The transcripts were analyzed, and themes were identified.

SETTING

The research was conducted at the King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from November 2007 to March 2008.

RESULTS

A total of 28 students participated in 7 focus group interviews. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with 12 teachers and 12 students. The analysis yielded four themes: summative assessment, formative assessment, continuous assessment of clinical attachments, and learning objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study confirm that assessment affects students' perceptions of learning and how they learn. These effects are not uniformly positive. According to the students, the predominantly summative assessment program offers little inducement to engage in deep learning. They express a clear preference for formative assessment, which may foster a deeper approach to learning. Efforts to achieve more clinically relevant assessment with adequate balance between the various types of assessment are required. Research is needed to decide this balance.

What every graduating medical student should know about urology: the stakeholder viewpoint

OBJECTIVES

What should every medical student know about urology upon graduating from medical school? To answer this question, we conducted a survey of key stakeholders in an effective medical student education in urology.

METHODS

Directors of the generalist residencies in the United States (emergency medicine, family medicine, internal medicine, and pediatrics), directors of urology residencies, medical student educators in urology, and applicants to the 2006 urology residency match were invited to complete an online survey. Participants were asked to select the 5 most important topics to be included in a core urology curriculum for all medical students.

RESULTS

Among 1859 stakeholders surveyed, response rates by stakeholder cohort ranged from 67% to 26% (overall 44%). There was marked homogeneity among participant groups as to what respondents considered to be the most important topics for a core urology curriculum for medical students. Based on aggregate data, the 8 most commonly cited topics included urinary stone disease (75% of respondents), hematuria (65%), urinary tract infections in adults (53%), benign prostatic hyperplasia (52%), urinary incontinence (45%), prostate cancer (45%), screening with prostate-specific antigen (33%), and testis torsion (24%).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey has identified the most important urology topics about which medical students should learn before graduation. Work is currently under way under the aegis of the American Urological Association to develop materials to standardize student education in these core topics across the United States.