Displaying all 7 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Lin GSS, Foong CC
    Eur J Dent Educ, 2024 Aug;28(3):816-824.
    PMID: 38622868 DOI: 10.1111/eje.13011
    INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to develop a module that incorporates hands-on and reflective feedback in teaching dental materials science and subsequently analyse undergraduate dental students' learning experiences with the module.

    MATERIALS AND METHODS: The module was developed based on the ADDIE (Analyse, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate) model. First, a need analysis was conducted, followed by designing the module to address the needs. Next, the module sought experts' feedback and was piloted. The revised module was implemented among all second-year undergraduate dental students. Finally, a validated questionnaire (5-point Likert scale items and open-ended questions) was used to evaluate students' learning experiences. The questionnaire Likert scale items were analysed descriptively, whereas open-ended responses were analysed using content analysis.

    RESULTS: In the analysis phase, a slight misalignment in cognitive competency levels was observed, alongside a need for the inclusion of more hands-on activities. In the design phase, learning objectives and resources were listed. Subsequently, a module consisting of four teaching sessions (3 h each) was developed, and the pilot test showed favourable feedback. The module was then implemented in small groups of 10-12 students. In the evaluation phase, 72 students (97% response rate) completed the questionnaire. The majority of students agreed with all items, with mean scores ranging from 4.53 to 4.72. Open-ended responses highlighted that hands-on activities and reflective feedback sessions were useful.

    CONCLUSION: Students demonstrated positive learning experiences after participating in the module, advocating for dental educators to consider more hands-on activities and reflective feedback sessions in teaching dental materials science.

    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
  2. Spooner M, Reinhardt C, Boland F, McConkey S, Pawlikowska T
    Med Educ Online, 2024 Dec 31;29(1):2330259.
    PMID: 38529848 DOI: 10.1080/10872981.2024.2330259
    There are differing views on how learners' feedback-seeking behaviours (FSB) develop during training. With globalisation has come medical student migration and programme internationalisation. Western-derived educational practices may prove challenging for diverse learner populations. Exploring undergraduate activity using a model of FSB may give insight into how FSB evolves and the influence of situational factors, such as nationality and site of study. Our findings seek to inform medical school processes that support feedback literacy. Using a mixed methods approach, we collected questionnaire and interview data from final-year medical students in Ireland, Bahrain, and Malaysia. A validated questionnaire investigated relationships with FSB and goal orientation, leadership style preference, and perceived costs and benefits. Interviews with the same student population explored their FSB experiences in clinical practice, qualitatively, enriching this data. The data were integrated using the 'following the thread' technique. Three hundred and twenty-five of a total of 514 completed questionnaires and 57 interviews were analysed. Learning goal orientation (LGO), instrumental leadership and supportive leadership related positively to perceived feedback benefits (0.23, 0.2, and 0.31, respectively, p feedback benefits are related positively to feedback monitoring and inquiry (0.13 and 0.38, respectively, p feedback is unsupported in quantitative data, but was a strong theme in interviews, as was feedback avoidance, peer feedback, and unsupportive learning environment. No differences were observed across sub-groups based on gender, study site, or student nationality. Integrated analysis describes FSB: avoiding 'unsafe' feedback (first, do no harm) and overcoming barriers (beat the system) and goal-centred curation (shop around) to optimise benefits. Diverse medical students across three continents undertake FSB with careful navigation, as a valued but risky business, that is highly contextualised. Promoting a constructive FSB is complex. Overcoming outdated theory and practices on the wards remains a challenge to psychologically safe, learner-centred feedback.
    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
  3. Cheah Whye Lian, Nan Ommar, Joanne Tan Sze Fern, Surizi Ismail, Tengku Sarah Tengku Mohd Sharifudin, Wong Syn Hwan
    MyJurnal
    Objective: To determine the perception of medical students towards mentor-mentee system in Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences of UNIMAS. Method: It was a cross-sectional study involving all 104 second year and 80 fifth year medical students. A self-administered questionnaire consisting of socio-demographic details, general perceptions on mentor-mentee system, academic support, personal development, and emotional and psychological support was distributed. The data was analysed using the SPSS version 19. Result: Majority of the subjects had a positive outlook towards the mentor-mentee system with a range of 45.6% to 57%. Three of the top rated perceptions were ‘mentor analyses mentee’s examination results and provides constructive feedback’, ‘mentor advises how to improve academic performance’, and ‘mentor gives encouragement and support for the challenges faced’ (66.8%, 68.0% and 62.9% respectively). Pre-cinical medical students had significantly better perception on mentor-mentee system than clinical students (p≤0.002) while those with non-clinician mentors significantly had better perceptions than those with clinician mentors (p≤0.003) on the system. No significant difference was found between the perceptions of males and females for all components (p=0.234 to 0.722). Conclusion: The mentor-mentee system was found to be successful as more than half of the respondents had posititve perception on the system and its aspects. However, pre-clinical students benefited more compared to clinical students, which reflects the need to look at the support given to clinical students. It was recommended that future studies should incorporate the perceptions of mentors.
    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
  4. Fong JYM, Tan VJH, Lee JR, Tong ZGM, Foong YK, Tan JME, et al.
    Eur J Dent Educ, 2018 Aug;22(3):160-166.
    PMID: 29266663 DOI: 10.1111/eje.12297
    AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of clinical audit-feedback cycle as an educational tool in improving the technical quality of root canal therapy (RCT) and compliance with record keeping performed by dental undergraduates.

    METHODS: Clinical audit learning was introduced in Year 3 of a 5-year curriculum for dental undergraduates. During classroom activities, students were briefed on clinical audit, selected their audit topics in groups of 5 or 6 students, and prepared and presented their audit protocols. One chosen topic was RCT, in which 3 different cohorts of Year 3 students conducted retrospective audits of patients' records in 2012, 2014 and 2015 for their compliance with recommended record keeping criteria and their performance in RCT. Students were trained by and calibrated against an endodontist (κ ≥ 0.8). After each audit, the findings were reported in class, and recommendations were made for improvement in performance of RCT and record keeping. Students' compliance with published guidelines was presented and their RCT performances in each year were compared using the chi-square test.

    RESULTS: Overall compliance with of record keeping guidelines was 44.1% in 2012, 79.6% in 2014 and 94.6% in 2015 (P = .001). In the 2012 audit, acceptable extension, condensation and the absence of mishap were observed in 72.4, 75.7% and 91.5%; in the 2014 audit, 95.1%, 64.8% and 51.4%; and in 2015 audit, 96.4%, 82.1% and 92.8% of cases, respectively. In 2015, 76.8% of root canal fillings met all 3 technical quality criteria when compared to 48.6% in 2014 and 44.7% in 2012 (P = .001).

    CONCLUSION: Clinical audit-feedback cycle is an effective educational tool for improving dental undergraduates' compliance with record keeping and performance in the technical quality of RCT.

    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback*
  5. Sarfaraz S, Ahmed N, Abbasi MS, Sajjad B, Vohra F, Al-Hamdan RS, et al.
    Work, 2020;67(4):791-798.
    PMID: 33325429 DOI: 10.3233/WOR-203332
    BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the self-perceived competency (FSPC) of medical faculty in E-Teaching and support received during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    METHODS: An online well-structured and validated faculty self-perceived competency questionnaire was used to collect responses from medical faculty. The questionnaire consisted of four purposely build sections on competence in student engagement, instructional strategy, technical communication and time management. The responses were recorded using a Likert ordinal scale (1-9). The Questionnaire was uploaded at www.surveys.google.com and the link was distributed through social media outlets and e-mails. Descriptive statistics and Independent paired t-test were used for analysis and comparison of quantitative and qualitative variables. A p-value of ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

    RESULTS: A total of 738 responses were assessed. Nearly 54% (397) participants had less than 5 years of teaching experience, 24.7% (182) had 6-10 years and 11.7% (86) had 11-15 years teaching expertise. 75.6% (558) respondents have delivered online lectures during the pandemic. Asynchronous methods were used by 61% (450) and synchronous by 39% (288) of participants. Moreover, 22.4% (165) participants revealed that their online lectures were evaluated by a structured feedback from experts, while 38.3% participants chose that their lectures were not evaluated. A significant difference (p feedback was more competent in comparison to peers teaching without feedback.

    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
  6. O'Donovan J, Maruthappu M
    Med Teach, 2015 May;37(5):463-9.
    PMID: 25182187 DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.956063
    To assess the feasibility and impact of using low-cost Android tablets to deliver video tutorials and remote online peer-tutoring for clinical skills between two countries.
    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
  7. Sim JH, Tong WT, Hong WH, Vadivelu J, Hassan H
    Med Educ Online, 2015;20:28612.
    PMID: 26511792 DOI: 10.3402/meo.v20.28612
    INTRODUCTION: Assessment environment, synonymous with climate or atmosphere, is multifaceted. Although there are valid and reliable instruments for measuring the educational environment, there is no validated instrument for measuring the assessment environment in medical programs. This study aimed to develop an instrument for measuring students' perceptions of the assessment environment in an undergraduate medical program and to examine the psychometric properties of the new instrument.
    METHOD: The Assessment Environment Questionnaire (AEQ), a 40-item, four-point (1=Strongly Disagree to 4=Strongly Agree) Likert scale instrument designed by the authors, was administered to medical undergraduates from the authors' institution. The response rate was 626/794 (78.84%). To establish construct validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with principal component analysis and varimax rotation was conducted. To examine the internal consistency reliability of the instrument, Cronbach's α was computed. Mean scores for the entire AEQ and for each factor/subscale were calculated. Mean AEQ scores of students from different academic years and sex were examined.
    RESULTS: Six hundred and eleven completed questionnaires were analysed. EFA extracted four factors: feedback mechanism (seven items), learning and performance (five items), information on assessment (five items), and assessment system/procedure (three items), which together explained 56.72% of the variance. Based on the four extracted factors/subscales, the AEQ was reduced to 20 items. Cronbach's α for the 20-item AEQ was 0.89, whereas Cronbach's α for the four factors/subscales ranged from 0.71 to 0.87. Mean score for the AEQ was 2.68/4.00. The factor/subscale of 'feedback mechanism' recorded the lowest mean (2.39/4.00), whereas the factor/subscale of 'assessment system/procedure' scored the highest mean (2.92/4.00). Significant differences were found among the AEQ scores of students from different academic years.
    CONCLUSIONS: The AEQ is a valid and reliable instrument. Initial validation supports its use to measure students' perceptions of the assessment environment in an undergraduate medical program.
    KEYWORDS: assessment environment; development; instrument; psychometric properties; validation
    Matched MeSH terms: Formative Feedback
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links