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.
Material and methods: Module tests (discipline-based assessments) comprising of discipline specific questions are conducted at the end of every term, mimicking the traditional discipline-specific assessment. Questions in the module tests are intended to assess the depth of knowledge of students. Mid semester examinations are conducted at the end of the semester, mimicking the integrated assessment. Integrated questions are intended to test the breadth of knowledge of students.
Results: Lecturers and students felt introduction of module tests, helped them to prepare for topics in a phased manner and better answer questions posed by lecturers during case discussions and clinical presentations. The 'borderline distinction' students felt that studying for module tests provided them with the depth of knowledge essential to answer questions during viva voce.
Discussion: Including both the traditional and integrated methods of assessments would engage students in a learning experience developing their breadth and depth of knowledge. Further prospective research is essential to assess the impact of this assessment strategy.
METHODS: A 5-point Likert scale valid and reliable questionnaire assessing the attitude towards PBL, ASC, and ILOC was given to phase one medical students at MAHSA University. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS ver. 22.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA).
RESULTS: Out of 255 participants, there were 84 males and 171 females, 175 Malaysians and 80 non-Malaysians. The results showed an overall acceptance of PBL with a mean of 3.7±0.07, ASC of 3.5±0.05 and ILOC of 2.9±0.05. Females showed a higher significant acceptance of PBL, ASC, and ILOC as compared with males. There was no difference between Malaysians and non-Malaysians in any of the variables measured. Simple regression analysis revealed a significant predictive effect of acceptance of PBL on ASC and ILOC (r=0.44 and r=0.88, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The higher the acceptance of PBL among students, the higher is the ASC and ILOC. This reflects the importance of PBL as a teaching method as well as the importance of increasing the level of appreciation of PBL amongst students.