1.1 Student selection and the influence of their clinical and academic environment on learning

Abstract

Student selection and recruitment play a vital role in the successful outcome of dental education. To identify key issues and practices in selection and recruitment, the group assessed current processes, philosophies and practices from a range of different educational systems, although it was not possible to gather data from all countries or continents within the timeframe provided. Furthermore, the group explored the effect of the educational learning environment on the successful outcome of teaching dental students. It is clear that a wide variety of practices and philosophies exist and are used in different parts of the world. Measuring the success of any given process used for student selection remains a challenge. In some parts of the world, certain practices have become an integral part of the tertiary educational system, and have been applied in a similar way by many or all of the dental schools in that country. In other countries, methods vary from one dental school to another, often reflecting differences in the structure and philosophy of the educational system. There was great variation in the combinations of selection criteria used and in student recruitment strategies. However, it was clear that there was much to be gained by learning from the experiences of other dental schools in student selection. Lessons learned, best practices and philosophies used and supporting value systems proved to be very helpful for benchmarking the processes used. In the discussion of student selection, a number of important questions were raised which deserve further thought and reflection both in the ongoing debate and as part of the ever-changing world of dental education. Important new matters that require more debate and research include: a) ethical issues, including the nature of funding from the student perspective, and the concern that in some regions dentistry may become a profession only for the elite or wealthy students. b) Health standards of students entering dental school. c) How realistic is the applicant's sense of dentistry as a profession? d) How accurate is the students' sense of their career opportunities and the employment market upon graduation? Finally, the over-arching question remains, how valid, reliable and predictable are existing selection practices? Will it be practical and meaningful to standardize methods used, or will exchanging ideas as part of this global debate assist the thought process of dental leaders to improve selection practices by learning from the experiences of other schools in different parts of the world? The processes of open debate, sharing ideas and opinions and identifying sound practices across the globe is a powerful catalyst for developing innovative answers to the complex problems posed by student selection and recruitment. A 'virtual' global process with wide input from as many dental schools as possible should improve the efficacy of student selection, and allow dental educators to identify the 'potential' of prospective students and predict more accurately dental...

Self‐perceived work preparedness of the graduating dental students

“…Innovative strategies to cultivate and support students' capacity for self‐directed learning in dental education has highlighted that health professional interaction in educational programmes and designing the environment to facilitate student self‐improvement and continuous professional development should be encouraged . Literature on education has accentuated that curriculum should acclimatise to suit different learning styles of the learner whilst keeping in mind that the graduates are future decision makers, researchers and dental educators …”

Is manual dexterity essential in the selection of dental students?

“…Presently, while in the United States DAT is a well codified instrument, consist ing of four major parts (Part I Survey of Natural Science, Part II Perceptual Abil ity, Part III Reading and Comprehen sion, Part IV Quantitative Reasoning), in Europe parameters taken into considera tion to select students change markedly from one country to the next and even within each country, from one univer sity to the next. [1][2][3][4][5][6] One of the most debated issues among the parameters used for selecting dental students was and still is basic manual skill: the question is whether it is still valid for selecting students and whether it is linked to their professional success. Many tests, such as perceptual motor ability, chalk carving, paper and pencil, as well as those proposed by Wilson 7 and by Suddick,8 have been used to correlate manual dexterity with success in dental schools.…”

Admission systems to dental school in Europe: a closer look at Flanders

“…The nature of the admission process depends not only on the number of candidates and the capacity of the educational facilities but also on the views of the school administration and the wider academic community, as well as national policy on the openness of higher education. There is a clear need for research to improve the reliability and predictive power of currently used admission methods (7). The admission procedure of a particular country determines the quality of the students selected.…”

“…A common vision is that those selected as the dentists of the future should be capable learners, fascinated by knowledge and research, open-minded, communicative and socially competent, and open to the promotion of health and to all preventive and curative aspects of their chosen profession (7). Clearly, such dental curriculum objectives provide a firm basis for designing dental education.…”

“…Due to historic, economic and cultural reasons the requirements for admission to dental education and the specific admission procedures used vary widely between the countries of Europe (7,8). Some countries allow everyone to start in the first year (e.g., France).…”