METHODS: The norm-referenced method of standard setting was applied to the real scores of 40 final-year dental students on a multiple-choice question (MCQ), a short answer question (SAQ), and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). A panel of 10 judges set the standard using the modified-Angoff method for the same paper in one sitting. One judge set the passing score of 10 OSCE questions after 2 weeks. A comparison of the grades and pass/fail rates derived from the absolute standard, norm-referenced, and modified-Angoff methods was made. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities of the modified-Angoff method were assessed.
RESULTS: The passing rate for the absolute standard was 100% (40/40), for the norm-referenced method it was 62.5% (25/40), and for the modified-Angoff method it was 80% (32/40). The modified-Angoff method had good inter-rater reliability of 0.876 and excellent test-retest reliability of 0.941.
CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the outcomes of these three standard-setting methods, as shown by the difference in the proportion of candidates who passed and failed the assessment. The modified-Angoff method was found to have good reliability for use with a professional qualifying dental examination.
METHODS: All second-year undergraduate Bachelor of Dental Surgery (BDS) students were invited to participate in a TBL-CBL session. These participants were randomly allocated to six different groups of 10-12 students, and the session was conducted by one lecturer as the facilitator. A 23-item questionnaire assessing four domains (perceptions of effectiveness, teacher, team interaction and learning environment) was administered at the end of the TBL-CBL session.
RESULTS: The response rate was 91.9% (n = 68). Mean scores for the questionnaire items ranged from 4.13 to 4.60 suggesting a positive perception among the students towards the hybrid TBL-CBL approach. Regarding the open-response questions, students emphasised that the TBL-CBL session was effective for team interaction and group discussions. However, students wished to have a better venue for future sessions.
CONCLUSION: Positive perceptions of the students encourage future educators to consider the use of TBL-CBL approach in teaching dental materials science and to avoid the reliance on standalone conventional lectures. Future research could consider examining its effects on students' academic achievement as well as the perspectives of teachers regarding its adoption in different dental specialities.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The development process of the new 2D CB SLE includes, (i) the identification of common errors made by students in the audiology clinic, (ii) the development of five case simulations that include four routine audiology tests incorporating learning assistance derived from the errors commonly made by audiology students and, (iii) the development of 2D CB SLE from a technical perspective. A preliminary evaluation of the use of the 2D CB SLE software was conducted among twenty-six second-year undergraduate audiology students.
RESULTS: The pre-analysis evaluation of the new 2D CB SLE showed that the majority of the students perceived the new 2D CB SLE software as realistic and helpful for them in achieving the course learning outcomes and in improving their clinical skills. The mean overall scores among the twenty-six students using the self-reported questionnaire were significantly higher when using the 2D CB SLE software than with the existing software typically used in their SLE training.
CONCLUSIONS: This new 2D CB SLE software has the potential for use by audiology students for enhancing their learning.
DESIGN: A required 2-credit-hour course was designed to provide an overview of public health pharmacy roles and the behavioral aspects of human healthcare issues. Graded activities included nursing home visits, in-class quizzes, mini-projects, and poster sessions, and a comprehensive final examination.
ASSESSMENT: The majority of the students performed well on the class activities and 93 (71.5%) of the 130 students enrolled received a grade of B or higher. A Web-based survey was administered at the end of the semester and 90% of students indicated that they had benefited from the course and were glad that it was offered. The majority of students agreed that the course made an impact in preparing them for their future role as pharmacists and expanded their understanding of the public health roles of a pharmacist.
CONCLUSIONS: A public health pharmacy course was successfully designed and implemented in the BPharm curriculum. This study highlighted the feasibilities of introducing courses that are of global relevance into a Malaysian pharmacy curriculum. The findings from the students' evaluation suggest the needs to incorporate a similar course in all pharmacy schools in the country and will be used as a guide to improve the contents and methods of delivery of the course at our school.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey of the tutors who had used the instrument was conducted to determine whether the assessment instrument or form was user-friendly. The 4 competencies assessed, using a 5-point rating scale, were (1) participation and communication skills, (2) cooperation or team-building skills, (3) comprehension or reasoning skills and (4) knowledge or information-gathering skills. Tutors were given a set of criteria guidelines for scoring the students' performance in these 4 competencies. Tutors were not attached to a particular PBL group, but took turns to facilitate different groups on different case or problem discussions. Assessment scores for one cohort of undergraduate medical students in their respective PBL groups in Year I (2003/2004) and Year II (2004/2005) were analysed. The consistency of scores was analysed using intraclass correlation.
RESULTS: The majority of the tutors surveyed expressed no difficulty in using the instrument and agreed that it helped them assess the students fairly. Analysis of the scores obtained for the above cohort indicated that the different raters were relatively consistent in their assessment of student performance, despite a small number consistently showing either "strict" or "indiscriminate" rating practice.
CONCLUSION: The instrument designed for the assessment of student performance in the PBL tutorial classroom setting is user-friendly and is reliable when used judiciously with the criteria guidelines provided.
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.
EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: A one day accelerated dispensing course using MyDispense software was delivered to 59 GE students. The accelerated dispensing course was identical to the standard three-week dispensing course delivered to UG students. The same assessment of dispensing skills was conducted after course completion for both UG and GE students and included dispensing four prescriptions of varying difficulty. The assessment scores of the UG and GE students were compared. Perception data from the accelerated course were also collected.
FINDINGS: The accelerated dispensing curriculum was well received by students. They found the simulation relevant to practice, easy to navigate, and helpful for preparing them for assessment. Overall, 5.1% of GE students failed the assessment, which was lower than the 32.6% failure rate in the UG cohort. Comparison of assessment grades between UG and GE students showed no notable disadvantage to attainment of learning outcomes with the accelerated curriculum. However, UG students were more likely to provide unsafe instructions compared to GE students in their labeling for three out of four prescriptions.
SUMMARY: An accelerated dispensing curriculum can be effectively delivered to mature learners with a prior science-related degree as no notable deficiencies were identified when comparing the assessment results of GE students against UG students when both student cohorts undertook the same dispensing assessment.