Teaching and assessment in otolaryngology and neurology: does the timing of clinical courses matter?

Abstract

Little is known about the effectiveness of clinical courses as a learning environment. To accurately assess performance in these courses, equal conditions for all candidates are required. We investigated the influence of the proximity of the course to the students test taking, the students' learning styles, and their self-motivation for learning in relation to performance success. One hundred and eleven students were randomized into eight groups, each attending a 2 week course in otolaryngology with a high proportion of patient-related teaching, and a 2 week long course in neurology with a low level of patient-related teaching. All students took multiple-choice end-of-term exams to assess their knowledge in both subjects. There was a different time interval between the course participation and the test taking for each of the groups. Performance success was correlated with the different groups, as well as with the type of learning style (LIST questionnaire) and with motivation for learning (study interest questionnaire). Explorative rank variance analysis showed a significant correlation between students' performance on the written exam and the time interval between completion of the neurology course and test-taking, with the shortest interval corresponding to highest scores (P = 0.002). There was no such effect on the success rate in otolaryngology (P = 0.28). Study motivation was not the major component for performance success, but a strong correlation between the use of strategic and deep learning styles and success in the exam was observed (R = 0.62; P < 0.001). The duration of time between a clinical course with little practical teaching and the students' taking of the exam plays a significant role on performance success; this effect does not occur in a course with a high proportion of practical patient-related teaching. More studies on clinical courses are needed to establish how students can be given adequate opportunities to develop necessary skills for patient care and for objective success on assessment. With such further information, the effectiveness of clinical courses as a learning experience might be enhanced.

Educational interventions in neurology: a comprehensive systematic review

“…Reaction evaluations, assessments, behavioural change and clinical outcomes of educational interventions were limited; only 16 randomized controlled trials were identified (Table ) that attained level 2 evidence . A Kirkpatrick evaluation or reaction was recorded in eight of 16 studies (50%), a learning outcome assessment was performed in 15 of 16 studies (94%), a behavioural change was measured in just two of the 16 studies (12%) and one (6%) assessed a clinical result or outcome (Table ).…”

“…The authors identified nine randomized trials and concluded that overall the studies failed to embrace but 'the most basic outcome measures' and that there was 'a need for increased rigour in medical educational studies'. were identified (Table 1) that attained level 2 evidence [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. A Kirkpatrick evaluation or reaction was recorded in eight of 16 studies (50%), a learning outcome assessment was performed in 15 of 16 studies (94%), a behavioural change was measured in just two of the 16 studies (12%) and one (6%) assessed a clinical result or outcome ( Table 2).…”

Microsurgical Skills Training With a New Tympanoplasty Model

“…In a different study, some questions of Schiefele's study interest questionnaire showed a prediction for positive written test results and high scores in a clinical practical examination in neurology and otolaryngology (10). The practical examination contained basic clinical examinations that were assessed in a standardized setup.…”

A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional Assessment of Otolaryngology Knowledge Among Primary Care Trainees

“…This desire for further exposure and training by students and primary care trainees has previously been studied, but solutions have not been explored. 3,4,[19][20][21][22][23][24] How can we as otolaryngologists improve the educational experience of these students and resident physicians? One possible answer is to solicit the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) for a compulsory rotation in our specialty during their undergraduate medical education.…”