MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lecturers and students in the Phase (Year) II programme were asked to fill questionnaires following the second and fourth PBL cases. The two sets of survey responses were compared to see whether the students' and teachers' perceptions had changed over the 5-month period.
RESULTS: Students' responses from both surveys (1 and 2) were similar in that a majority agreed that the PBL tutorials had encouraged the seeking of information (66% and 67%, respectively), had improved understanding (57% and 56%), integration (65% and 70%) and application (50% and 64%) of knowledge. However, the views given in the form of written comments, following their positive responses, were somewhat contradictory. A large number of students (38% and 40%) faced difficulties in getting involved in discussions during the PBL tutorial and a majority (73% and 82%) preferred the normal subject-based tutorials. The reasons given by approximately 20% of the students were that the subject-based tutorials were more efficient for obtaining information and/or that the information had been pre-selected by the lecturers. More than 80% of the lecturers (in both surveys) perceived that the students had identified the appropriate learning objectives and covered the subject matter. The percentage of lecturers who agreed that PBL tutorials encouraged rapport and teamwork amongst students had increased in the second survey, from 70% to 92% and 55% to 83% respectively.
CONCLUSION: Implementing PBL is not simply a matter of developing new teaching materials and new effective ways of presenting them. It requires a paradigm shift, a change in the roles of students and teachers, and time.
METHODS: The study consisted of two phases. In Phase 1, a 10-item instrument (SAIL-10) was developed and tested on a cohort of medical and pharmacy students who attended the workshop. In Phase 2, different cohorts of medical and pharmacy students completed SAIL-10 before and after participating in the workshop.
RESULTS: Factor analysis showed that SAIL-10 has two domains: "facilitators of interprofessional learning" and "acceptance to learning in groups". The overall SAIL-10 and the two domains have adequate internal consistency and stable reliability. The total score and scores for the two domains were significantly higher after students attended the prescribing skills workshop.
CONCLUSIONS: This study produced a valid and reliable instrument, SAIL-10 which was used to demonstrate that the prescribing skills workshop, where medical and pharmacy students were placed in an authentic context, was a promising activity to promote interprofessional learning among future healthcare professionals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MCQ items in papers taken from Year II Parts A, B and C examinations for Sessions 2001/02, and Part B examinations for 2002/03 and 2003/04, were analysed to obtain their difficulty indices and discrimination indices. Each paper consisted of 250 true/false items (50 questions of 5 items each) on topics drawn from different disciplines. The questions were first constructed and vetted by the individual departments before being submitted to a central committee, where the final selection of the MCQs was made, based purely on the academic judgement of the committee.
RESULTS: There was a wide distribution of item difficulty indices in all the MCQ papers analysed. Furthermore, the relationship between the difficulty index (P) and discrimination index (D) of the MCQ items in a paper was not linear, but more dome-shaped. Maximal discrimination (D = 51% to 71%) occurred with moderately easy/difficult items (P = 40% to 74%). On average, about 38% of the MCQ items in each paper were "very easy" (P > or =75%), while about 9% were "very difficult" (P <25%). About two-thirds of these very easy/difficult items had "very poor" or even negative discrimination (D < or =20%).
CONCLUSIONS: MCQ items that demonstrate good discriminating potential tend to be moderately difficult items, and the moderately-to-very difficult items are more likely to show negative discrimination. There is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of our MCQ items.