IntroductionThe number of distractors needed for high quality multiple choice questions (MCQs) will be determined by many factors. These include firstly whether English language is their mother tongue or a foreign language; secondly whether the instructors who construct the questions are experts or not; thirdly the time spent on constructing the options is also an important factor. It has been observed by Tarrant et al that more time is often spent on constructing questions than on tailoring sound, reliable, and valid distractors.ObjectivesFirstly, to investigate the effects of reducing the number of options on psychometric properties of the item. Secondly, to determine the frequency of functioning distractors among three or four options in the MCQs examination of the dermatology course in University of Bahri, College of Medicine.Materials and methodsThis is an experimental study which was performed by means of a dermatology exam, MCQs type. Forty MCQs, with one correct answer for each question were constructed. Two sets of this exam paper were prepared: in the first one, four options were given, including one key answer and three distractors. In the second set, one of the three distractors was deleted randomly, and the sequence of the questions was kept in the same order. Any distracter chosen by less than 5% of the students was regarded as non-functioning. Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (Kr-20) measures the internal consistency and reliability of an examination with an acceptable range 0.8–1.0. Chi square test was used to compare the distractors in the two exams.ResultsA significant difference was observed in discrimination and difficulty indexes for both sets of MCQs. More distractors were non-functional for set one (of four options), but slightly more reliable. The reliability (Kr-20) was slightly higher for set one (of four options). The average marks in option three and four were 34.163 and 33.140, respectively.ConclusionCompared to set 1 (four options), set 2 (of three options) was more discriminating and associated with low difficulty index but its reliability was low.

IntroductionLearning environment might be defined as anything that can affect the learning directly or indirectly. During the era of accreditation and quality assurance, we are badly in need to evaluate our program strength and pick possible areas for curriculum reform.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the perception of medical students in the University of Bahri (UB) about the educational environment and analyze the variation of this perception with gender, level of study, type of intake, type of certificate, and accommodation.MethodologyThis is a cross-sectional study that was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, UB, in Sudan during July–August 2017, enrolling 347 students. Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM) questionnaire was used as a survey tool for this study.ResultsOverall DREEM average score of 125.2997/200 is perceived. This score is distributed in all DREEM subclasses.ConclusionHaving some negative perceptions is a huge burden on policymakers, administration, and all stakeholders to revise the whole educational environment at the UB with special efforts needed for curriculum revision, faculty development, mentoring, and other skills development.

Aim Students’ performance in TBL compared to LBL needs to be evaluated. This study aimed to compare students’ performance in team-based learning and traditional lectures. Methods A total of 176 class 4 and 202 class 6 medical students from University of Bahri, Khartoum, Sudan, participated in the study during 2018. Experienced staff were selected to conduct the teaching and assessment of the two groups, using the standard team-based learning procedure (iRAT, gRAT and AppT) in the first topic and the lecture-based learning procedure in the second, within the same time limit for the two methods. Results The two classes overall mean score has a significant 5.1 points difference (p<0.001; 95% CI: 3.5, 6.0). Separate analysis showed consistency of superiority of TBL to LBL in either gender. A remarkable difference was observed when we compared the two methods in class 6 separately from class 4. Class 6 mean score was high for both TBL and LBL (77.2 and 70.2, respectively), with a significant mean difference of 7.0 (p<0.001; 95% CI: 5.1, 8.9). In class 4, the score was lower for both methods (mean of 62.8 for TBL and 59.9 for LBL). The mean difference of 2.95 points was still significant (p<0.05; 95% CI: 0.46, 5.43). Separate multivariate linear regression for TBL and LBL showed no significant difference in performance of males and females in either method. Controlling for gender in TBL, class 4 had a mean of −14.26 points, (p<0.001; 95% CI: −12.54, −15.98) less than class 6. Similarly, in LBL, class 4 had a mean of −10.18 points (p<0.001, 95% CI: −7.02, −13.35), less than class 6. Conclusion Students’ performance using team-based learning was superior to lecture-based learning, irrespective of students’ gender, noticeable among senior students.

No abstract