Cargando…

Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map

BACKGROUND: Following student feedback, a Curriculum Map (CM) was commissioned in 2018 at UCL Medical School (UCLMS). After exploring key requirements of a CM, the second phase focused on building a prototype before its launch. This study evaluates this novel pedagogical intervention following its i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wardle, Katie, Chakrabarti, Rima, Wright, Tor, Bennie, Taylor, Ntuiabane, Daniel, Gishen, Faye
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10088241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04224-1
_version_ 1785022530686287872
author Wardle, Katie
Chakrabarti, Rima
Wright, Tor
Bennie, Taylor
Ntuiabane, Daniel
Gishen, Faye
author_facet Wardle, Katie
Chakrabarti, Rima
Wright, Tor
Bennie, Taylor
Ntuiabane, Daniel
Gishen, Faye
author_sort Wardle, Katie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Following student feedback, a Curriculum Map (CM) was commissioned in 2018 at UCL Medical School (UCLMS). After exploring key requirements of a CM, the second phase focused on building a prototype before its launch. This study evaluates this novel pedagogical intervention following its implementation, from the perspective of its primary users, UCL medical students. METHODS: This multi-method study was conducted two months after the CM’s launch in 2019. Quantitative and qualitative data was gathered via a survey and focus groups across four domains: usefulness, satisfaction, appearance, and content. Reflective Thematic Analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data to build themes. RESULTS: One hundred ninety five participants (195/1347, 14%) responded to the survey and two focus groups were held. Higher rates of satisfaction were seen among later years compared to early years students. Five key themes emerged on the CM as a: UCLMS textbook; learning aid for assessments; tool for capturing scientific content; modern learning technology and tool for ‘levelling the playing field’. Key findings suggest that while students welcomed a centralised resource to create transparency, there were clear differences between early and later years students, with the former preferring a more prescriptive approach. Learning was assessment-driven across all years and students highlighted their desire for greater clarity on the importance of curricular content for summative assessments. CONCLUSION: A CM provides a benchmark for medical educators on the undergraduate curriculum, which must be balanced with its limitations; a CM cannot provide an exhaustive syllabus and needs to be supplemented with self-directed learning and clinical preparation for practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04224-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10088241
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100882412023-04-12 Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map Wardle, Katie Chakrabarti, Rima Wright, Tor Bennie, Taylor Ntuiabane, Daniel Gishen, Faye BMC Med Educ Research BACKGROUND: Following student feedback, a Curriculum Map (CM) was commissioned in 2018 at UCL Medical School (UCLMS). After exploring key requirements of a CM, the second phase focused on building a prototype before its launch. This study evaluates this novel pedagogical intervention following its implementation, from the perspective of its primary users, UCL medical students. METHODS: This multi-method study was conducted two months after the CM’s launch in 2019. Quantitative and qualitative data was gathered via a survey and focus groups across four domains: usefulness, satisfaction, appearance, and content. Reflective Thematic Analysis was used to analyse the qualitative data to build themes. RESULTS: One hundred ninety five participants (195/1347, 14%) responded to the survey and two focus groups were held. Higher rates of satisfaction were seen among later years compared to early years students. Five key themes emerged on the CM as a: UCLMS textbook; learning aid for assessments; tool for capturing scientific content; modern learning technology and tool for ‘levelling the playing field’. Key findings suggest that while students welcomed a centralised resource to create transparency, there were clear differences between early and later years students, with the former preferring a more prescriptive approach. Learning was assessment-driven across all years and students highlighted their desire for greater clarity on the importance of curricular content for summative assessments. CONCLUSION: A CM provides a benchmark for medical educators on the undergraduate curriculum, which must be balanced with its limitations; a CM cannot provide an exhaustive syllabus and needs to be supplemented with self-directed learning and clinical preparation for practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04224-1. BioMed Central 2023-04-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10088241/ /pubmed/37038175 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04224-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wardle, Katie
Chakrabarti, Rima
Wright, Tor
Bennie, Taylor
Ntuiabane, Daniel
Gishen, Faye
Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title_full Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title_fullStr Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title_short Evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an MBBS Curriculum Map
title_sort evaluating a novel intervention in undergraduate medicine: an mbbs curriculum map
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10088241/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038175
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04224-1
work_keys_str_mv AT wardlekatie evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap
AT chakrabartirima evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap
AT wrighttor evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap
AT bennietaylor evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap
AT ntuiabanedaniel evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap
AT gishenfaye evaluatinganovelinterventioninundergraduatemedicineanmbbscurriculummap