Background At King Abdulaziz University, medical and health science schools depend on admission exams (aptitude and achievement) and preparatory year scores in their students’ selection. However, with the growing number of applicants and the drastic changes in teaching and assessment in these colleges, continuous assessment and development of admission criteria are needed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation of admission exam scores, in addition to the preparatory year Grade Point Average (GPA), with academic performance in the basic science subjects such as Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology in health science colleges.Methods The study was conducted on four cohort studies, two faculty of nursing cohorts; nursing students (2017-2018,n=146) nursing students (2018-2019,n=81), and two faculty of applied medical sciences cohorts, clinical nutrition students (2017-2018,n=33), and clinical nutrition students (2018-2019,n=28). The students’ scores of General Aptitude Test (GAT), Scholastic Achievement Admission Test (SAAT), and preparatory year GPA were all recorded at the beginning of each semester before the beginning of courses. Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology exam results were recorded at the end of the semester. Correlation was done for each cohort and all cohorts pooled. Results Results showed only a weak correlation detected between SAAT and the overall achievement in Clinical Biochemistry ( r= 0.192, P= 0.042) in nursing students (2017-2018), but no correlation was seen with SAAT or preparatory year scores. There was also no significant correlation between admission exams scores and the students’ academic achievement in Clinical Biochemistry or Clinical Pharmacology. On the other hand Clinical Pharmacology exam results showed a significant positive correlation with Clinical Biochemistry results (r=0.688, P=0.000). ConclusionOur results could indicate the need to revisit the admission criteria for these colleges. Furthermore, specific preparatory year tracks for health science colleges can ensure that students improve the specific skills and knowledge required for their future college years.

Background: In King Abdulaziz University, medical and health science schools depend on admission exams (Aptitude and Achievement) and Preparatory year scores in their students’ selection. However, with the growing number of applicants and the drastic changes in teaching and assessment in these colleges continuous assessment and development of admission criteria are needed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation of admission exam scores, in addition to the Preparatory year GPA, with academic performance in the basic science subjects such as Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology in health science colleges.Methods: The study was conducted on four cohort studies, two faculty of nursing cohorts; Nursing students (2017-2018,n=146) Nursing students (2018-2019,n=81), and two faculty of applied medical sciences cohorts, C.Nutrition students (2017-2018,n=33), C.Nutrition students (2018-2019,n=28) .The students’ scores of GAT, SAAT, and preparatory year GPA were all recorded at the beginning of each semester before the beginning of courses. Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology exam results were recorded at the end of the semester. Correlation was done for each cohort and all cohorts pooled. Results: Results showed that there was no significant correlation between admission exams scores and the students ‘academic achievement in Clinical Pharmacology, and with only a weak correlation detected between SAAT and the overall achievement in Clinical Biochemistry ( r= 0.192*, P= 0.042) in Nursing students (2017-2018). On the other hand Clinical Pharmacology exam results showed a significant positive correlation with Clinical Biochemistry results (r=0.688, P=0.000). Conclusion: Our results could indicate the need to revisit the admission criteria for these colleges. Furthermore, specific preparatory year tracks for health science colleges can ensure that students improve the specific skills and knowledge required for their future college years.

Background: Team-Based Learning (TBL) which encourages students to become active rather than passive learners has gained world-wide popularity in medical education due to its proven positive effect on more than one aspect of the educational process. At King Abdulaziz University (KAU), clinical biochemistry is still taught in the form of didactic lectures, and while there is a need for introducing active learning, student learning response from TBL has not been explored. Methods: In our case-control study, we compared learning outcomes and student satisfaction in a clinical biochemistry course taught either via TBL to second year Clinical Nutrition students (n= 33) or via traditional lectures to same year Nursing students (n=70). The same summative post-course exam was given to both student groups to assess impact on learning. Focus group discussion and a self-administered questionnaire were used to gain insight into Clinical Nutrition students’ level of satisfaction with TBL. Results: In the post-course exam results of recall and reasoning questions, Nursing students scored an average of 38%±2.4 in the recall questions while Clinical Nutrition students scored higher with an average of 74.5%±4.3 (p<0.0001). In reasoning questions, Nursing students scored lower than Clinical Nutrition students, 23%±2.7 versus 40%±4.2 respectively (p<0.001). In comparing results of pre- and post-test recall questions within each group, there was no significant difference between pre- and post-results for Nursing students while Clinical Nutrition students showed a significant increase in post- versus pre-test results of 71% versus 41% (p<0.0001). In the final summative post-course exam, Nursing students scored an average of 60% ±2.4 while Clinical Nutrition students scored significantly higher with an average of 78%±2.4 (p<0.001). Qualitative studies revealed that accountability and team-work were positive aspects perceived by students regarding TBL and 84% of surveyed students enjoyed the experience while self-study was their main challenge. Conclusion: TBL proved to be a successful, learner-centered approach for Clinical Nutrition students at KAU in their clinical biochemistry course resulting in improved learning outcomes and higher student satisfaction when compared with traditional didactic methods of teaching.

Background: In King Abdulaziz University, medical and health science schools depend on admission exams (Aptitude and Achievement) and Preparatory year scores in their students’ selection. However, with the growing number of applicants and the drastic changes in teaching and assessment in these colleges continuous assessment and development of admission criteria are needed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation of admission exam scores, in addition to the Preparatory year GPA, with academic performance in the basic science subjects such as Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology in health science colleges.Methods: The study was conducted on four cohort studies, two faculty of nursing cohorts; Nursing students (2017-2018,n=146) Nursing students (2018-2019,n=81), and two faculty of applied medical sciences cohorts, Clinical Nutrition students (2017-2018,n=33), Clinical Nutrition students (2018-2019,n=28) .The students’ scores of General Aptitude Test (GAT), Scholastic Achievement Admission Test (SAAT ), and preparatory year GPA were all recorded at the beginning of each semester before the beginning of courses. Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology exam results were recorded at the end of the semester. Correlation was done for each cohort and all cohorts pooled. Results: Results showed only a weak correlation detected between SAAT and the overall achievement in Clinical Biochemistry ( r= 0.192*, P= 0.042) in Nursing students (2017-2018) but no correlation was seen with SAAT or preparatory year scores. There was also no significant correlation between admission exams scores and the students ‘academic achievement in Clinical Pharmacology, and with On the other hand Clinical Pharmacology exam results showed a significant positive correlation with Clinical Biochemistry results (r=0.688, P=0.000). Conclusion: Our results could indicate the need to revisit the admission criteria for these colleges. Furthermore, specific preparatory year tracks for health science colleges can ensure that students improve the specific skills and knowledge required for their future college years.

Background: Team-Based Learning (TBL) which encourages students to become active rather than passive learners has gained world-wide popularity in medical education due to its proven positive effect on more than one aspect of the educational process. At King Abdulaziz University (KAU), clinical biochemistry is still taught in the form of didactic lectures, and while there is a need for introducing active learning, student learning response from TBL has not been explored. Methods: In our case-control study, we compared learning outcomes and student satisfaction in a clinical biochemistry course taught either via TBL to second year Clinical Nutrition students (n= 33) or via traditional lectures to same year Nursing students (n=70). The same summative post-course exam was given to both student groups to assess impact on learning. Focus group discussion and a self-administered questionnaire were used to gain insight into Clinical Nutrition students’ level of satisfaction with TBL. Results: In the post-course exam results of recall and reasoning questions, Nursing students scored an average of 38%±2.4 in the recall questions while Clinical Nutrition students scored higher with an average of 74.5%±4.3 (p<0.0001). In reasoning questions, Nursing students scored lower than Clinical Nutrition students, 23%±2.7 versus 40%±4.2 respectively (p<0.001). In comparing results of pre- and post-test recall questions within each group, there was no significant difference between pre- and post-results for Nursing students while Clinical Nutrition students showed a significant increase in post- versus pre-test results of 71% versus 41% (p<0.0001). In the final summative post-course exam, Nursing students scored an average of 60% ±2.4 while Clinical Nutrition students scored significantly higher with an average of 78%±2.4 (p<0.001). Qualitative studies revealed that accountability and team-work were positive aspects perceived by students regarding TBL and 84% of surveyed students enjoyed the experience while self-study was their main challenge. Conclusion: TBL proved to be a successful, learner-centered approach for Clinical Nutrition students at KAU in their clinical biochemistry course resulting in improved learning outcomes and higher student satisfaction when compared with traditional didactic methods of teaching.