Evaluation of physiology lectures conducted by students: comparison between evaluation by staff and students

Abstract

As a peer-assisted learning process, minilectures on physiology were conducted by students. During this process, students lecture to their colleagues in the presence of faculty staff members. These lectures were evaluated by faculty staff and students simultaneously. The aim of this study was to compare feedback from faculty members and students on 66 minilectures conducted by students. Their perception of different qualities of lecture was assessed using a questionnaire. There were significant correlations between students and faculty members for many qualities of the lecture, including the speed of the lecture, retaining attention, clear introduction, and the overall quality of the lecture. However, ratings for gesture, eye contact, language usage, illustration usage, audiovisuals, voice usage, and important points stressed were significantly different between students and faculty members. Multiple regression analysis was performed to assess the degree of effect of different aspects of a lecture on its overall quality. Aspects such as gesture, eye contact, and language usage showed very low β-values, suggesting a poor contribution of these factors to the overall quality of the lecture for both students and faculty members. The speed of the lecture, retaining attention, and clear introduction were qualities that faculty members and students rated equally, and these were the main contributors to the overall quality of the lecture. Awareness about the possible discrepancy between ratings given by faculty members and students may be important when interpreting the evaluation results of formal lectures by these two groups.

Experience from an optional dissection course in a clinically‐orientated concept to complement system‐based anatomy in a reformed curriculum

“…Also, in the present study, there existed some concerns, whereby the students predominantly feared that teacher evaluations would be harsher than those by their peers. For instance, students' lectures on physiology were rated lower by faculty members than by students (Kommalage and Gunawardena, ), which contrasts with the present study and previous reports (Albanese et al, ; Lurie et al, ) when students with low levels of interpersonal attributes were proposed to be more negative in their judgment of classmates (Lurie et al, ) while advantageous personal performance scores were achieved by those students who assessed others (Schönrock‐Adema et al, ). Aside the above described didactic effects of self‐assessment, the concept of the present study that all students of the unit rated all presentations including their own, also avoided such as raters' selection bias.…”

“…Not many systematic studies have differentiated the outcome of modern medical teaching tools (Kommalage and Gunawardena, ; Drake, ; McBride and Drake, ), and more experience on how to score individual contributions of specific course components to a highly structured human anatomy course is needed (Shaffer, ; Raubenheimer et al, ). Therefore, an assessment system was introduced, which should monitor the self‐directed team‐based learning process by in‐course assessments, but also reflect all skills including practical dissection and communication.…”

The students' voice: Strengths and weaknesses of an undergraduate medical curriculum in a developing country, a qualitative study

“…Several other studies have focused either on specific educational interventions [7,8] or evaluated only a specific section of the curriculum [9]. Curriculum evaluation in many ways drives the development and evolution of curricula [10].…”

Peer-Assisted and Team-Based Learning: A new hybrid strategy for Medical Education

“…Therefore, this strategy may be useful to meet the expected competencies of the Educational area present in medical curricula such as the Brazilian 4 , once it might present practical and effective ways for medical students to develop teaching experience 12 . Examples of areas in the medical curriculum that can be supported by PAL projects are Human Anatomy and Physiology 10,[12][13][14] .…”

“…Works previously published on Physiology PAL in medical education presented training programs focused basically on the principles of teaching, which included theoretical studying and practical training 12,13 . Thus, tutors developed teaching skills that involved the interplay of three processes: metacognitive awareness; deliberate practice, and self-explanation 12 .…”