Cargando…

Audience-response systems for evaluation of pediatric lectures – comparison with a classic end-of-term online-based evaluation

Aim: Course evaluations are often conducted and analyzed well after the course has taken place. By using a digital audience response system (ARS), it is possible to collect, view and discuss feedback during or directly following a course or lecture session. This paper analyzes a student evaluation o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bode, Sebastian Felix Nepomuk, Straub, Christine, Giesler, Marianne, Biller, Silke, Forster, Johannes, Krüger, Marcus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4446649/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26038683
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma000960
Descripción
Sumario:Aim: Course evaluations are often conducted and analyzed well after the course has taken place. By using a digital audience response system (ARS), it is possible to collect, view and discuss feedback during or directly following a course or lecture session. This paper analyzes a student evaluation of a lecture course with ARS to determine if significant differences exist between the results of the ARS lecture evaluation and those of the online evaluation at the end of the semester. In terms of the overall evaluation, consideration is given to the level of students’ prior knowledge, the presentation of the lecture material by the lecturers and the relevance of the lecture topic for students. Method: During the 2011-12 winter semester, the lecture on Pediatrics at the Freiburg Center for Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine (Zentrum für Kinder- und Jugendmedizin (ZKJ) Freiburg) was evaluated using ARS. Thirty-four lectures were evaluated by an average of 22 (range 8-44) students, who responded to four questions each time an evaluation took place. Results: On a 6-point Likert scale (1=very good to 6=deficient), the students rated their level of preparedness with a mean of 3.18, the presentation of the lecture with 2.44, and the relevance of the lecture topic with 2.19. The overall evaluation of the lecture course by means of ARS resulted in 2.31. The online evaluation conducted at the end of the semester yielded a score of 2.45. Highly significant correlations were seen between the results of the ARS for the overall evaluation, assessment of prior knowledge, lecture presentation, and the estimated relevance of the lecture topic. Conclusion: The use of ARS is suitable for immediate evaluation of lectures, in particular regarding timely feedback for the individual lecturerlecturers. In comparison with an end-of-term evaluation, ARS yielded a better assessment.