The Impact of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Gezira, Innovative Programme on its Graduates
Abstract
Introduction: Programme evaluation is the collection and interpretation, through systemic and formal means, of relevant information which serves as a basis for rational judgment in decision situations. This study was conducted as part of the third programme development of the Faculty of Medicine, Gezira University 2010 – 2011.
Objectives: The general objective is to study the impact of the Faculty of Medicine, Gezira University, innovative programme, on its graduates. The specific objectives include the evaluation of graduates' competences in the three main areas of domain of learning, i.e. Knowledge, skills and attitude.
Materials and Methods: This is a Cross-sectional Study conducted in the period from13th. of January to 12th. of February 2011. The study population includes 146 consultants who have Gezira graduates training with them including house officers, medical officers and registrars. Excluded from the study all consultants who are academic staff members in the FMUG, who are Gezira graduates or who are involved in student training. A questionnaire was designed to answer the questions that address the objectives of the study covered in 32 questions, using a grading scales; 1 to 5: where 1= poor; 2= less than average, 3= average; 4= good; 5= excellent.
Results: the response rate for the questionnaire was 73% (146/210), representing 146 consultants working in 23 hospitals in 12 cities. In the overall evaluation of graduates΄ knowledge and cognitive abilities, graduates were rated as good to excellent in (68.3%), average in (25.12%) and poor to below average in only a minority of the graduates. In the overall evaluation of graduates΄ skills and competences, graduates were rated as good to excellent in (72.33%), average in (20.81%) and poor to below average in only a minority of the graduates. In the overall evaluation of attitudes and ethical standards, graduates were rated as good to excellent in the majority (84.06%). In the overall classification, graduates were rated as good to excellent in the vast majority (82.6%), average in the minority (14.5%) and poor to below average in only a few cases.
Conclusion The evaluation of graduates' competences is an important element in the educational programme evaluation. These results provide evidence in favour for the innovative educational programme and can encourage other medical schools to adopt it. Further studies are needed to cover other aspects of graduates' evaluations.
References
2. Abdel Rahim I.M., (1989). Six strategies for effective & relevant medical education as adopted in Gezira Medical School. Saudi Medical Journal 10, 391-395.
3. (FMUG self-evaluation report, 2008-2009. The Educational Programme – 2.1. The principles guiding the design of curriculum, page: 6).
4. FMUG self-evaluation report 2008-2009. The Educational Programme – 2.8. The curriculum structure of the school, page: 10).
5. Graduates booklet – Dean of Academic Afairs, U of G
6. Stevens, B L (1978). Programme evaluation. I n A. G Pezler & B I Stevens (Ed.). The nurse evaluator in education and service; pp 228-238. New York MacGrawhill.
7. Wholy, J S et al (1994). Handbook of practical programme evaluation. San Francisco: Jossy -Bass
8. Worthen, B. R (1990). Program evaluation. H. Walberg & G. Haertel (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of educational evaluation (pp. 42-47). Toronto, ON: Pergammon Press.
9. Dressel, P (1976). Hanbook of academic evaluation. San Francisco: Jossy -Bass.
10. Guba, E G & Lincoln, Y S (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossy -Bass.
11. Walberg HJ (1990). Haertel GD (eds.). The International Encyclopaedia of Educational Evaluation. Pergamon, Oxford, England, 1990.
12. Making medical practice and medical education more relevant to people’s needs: the contribution of the family doctor. A working paper from the World Health Organization and the World Organization of Family Doctors from the joint WHO/WONCA conference November 6–8, 1994. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1995:42–3.
13. Neame R et al. Universities without walls: evolving paradigms in medical education. British medical journal, 1999, 319:1296.
14. Boelen C (1995). Prospects for change in medical education in the twenty-first century. Academic medicine, 70(7 suppl.): S21–31.
15. Susser M. Pioneering community-oriented primary care (1999). Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 77:436–8.
16. Schmidt, H.G., Dauphine, W.D., and Patel, V.L., (1987). Comparing the effect of problem-based and conventional curricula in an international sample. Journal of medical education, 62, 305-315.
17. Seefeld, M., Ahmed, B. O., Mustafa, A. E., Ali, M. M. & Ali, G. M. (1989)The approach & major findings of the programme evaluation of Gezira University Medical School, innovation, 10th. year. World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region Health Services Journal of the; No 6, 32 – 38.
18. Abdel Rahim, I.M., Mustafa, A.E., and Ahmed, B.O. (1992). Performance evaluation of graduates from a community-based curriculum: The housemanship period at Gezira medical school. Medical Education; 26(3): 233 – 240.
19. Poster CV, Gvoen GL, Norman GR (1991). Effects of Conventional and Problem – Based Medical Curricula or Problem Solving. Acad. Med. 66: 380 – 9.
20. Hmelo, C. E. & Ferrari, M. (1997). The problem-based learning tutorial: Cultivating higher order thinking skills. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 401-422
21. Schmidt, H.G., Vermeulen, L., and Van Der Molen, H.T. (2006). Long-term effects of problem-based learning: a comparison of competencies acquired by graduates of a problem-based and a conventional medical school. Medical Education, 40( 6), 562–567.
22. Vernon DTA, Blake RL (1993). Does Problem – Based Learning Work? A Meta-analysis of Evaluation Research. Acad. Med.; 68: 550 – 63.
23. Glick, S. And Margolis, C. (1991). Medical education in Israel: Directions and challenages. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 3(4): 195-199.
24. Friedberg, M., and Glick, S.M.,(1997). Evaluation of innovative school's graduates by department heads at other hospitals, Vol. 19, No. 1 , Pages 36-39.
25. Albanese MA, Mitchell S (1993). Problem-Based Learning, A Review of Literature on its Outcomes & Implementation Issues. Acad. Med.; 68: 52 – 81.
26. Blumberg, P. & Michael, J. A. (1992). Development of self directed learning behaviors in a partially teacher directed problem based learning curriculum. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 4 (1), 3 8.
27. Schmidt HG (1993). Intrinsic Motivation & Achievement: Two Exploratory Studies. Pedagog. Stud.; 60: 385 – 95.
28. Barrows, H S and Tamblyn, G S (1980). Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education. New York: Springer.
29. Friedman CP et al. Charting the winds of change: evaluating innovative medical curricula. Academic medicine, 1990, 65(1):8-14.
30. Merghani, O A and Elsaousi, M E (2007). Problem Based Learning in the Faculty of Medicine-University of Gezira. Gezira Journal of Health Sciences; 3(1): 3-7.
31. Elaine H. J. Yew & Henk G. Schmidt (1997 ). Evidence for constructive, self-regulatory, and collaborative processes in problem based learning. Advances in Health Sciences Education, DOI 10.1007/s10459-008-9105-7.
