Evaluation of Physiology Teaching Methods in Chandrapur Government Medical College
Background: The primary goal of medical education is to produce quality doctors and not just quantity. Heightened focus on the quality of teaching in the new medical college has led to increased use of student surveys as a means of evaluating teaching.
Aim: This study was undertaken to evaluate various teaching methods and skills adopted by a teacher in Physiology lectures by first year MBBS students of two successive batches admitted in newly established Chandrapur Government Medical College.
Methods: A pre-validated questionnaire consisting of 18 questions was given to 100 first year medical students of first two successive batches towards the end of their academic year and feedback was taken in the form of selecting the most appropriate option applicable (OPTION: A = Always, M = Most Often, S = Sometimes, N = Never). Total numbers of A, M, S and N were calculated and given 3, 2, 1 and 0 marks for every A, M, S and N circled respectively. Maximum possible score was 54. 45 to 54 marks – Exceptional teaching skills, 30 to 44 marks – Superior teaching skills, 15 to 29 marks – Average teaching skills, 0 to 14 marks – Room for improvement.
Results: In the first batch, maximum score was given for having clarity with the concepts and being audible, using simple language and audio-visual aids and explaining them their errors and how better they can perform. In second batch, apart from this, maximum score was given for relating the topic with their lives, giving examples, summarizing the concepts, asking them to answer questions, applying information in solving problems, encouraging them to learn in different ways, listening their comments, giving them feedback and finding out frequently whether every student has learnt the skills.
Conclusion: Every medical teacher who delivers a lecture should make teaching meaningful with clarity in the concepts and audibility, promoting active learning by the students, understanding the individual differences, giving feedback at regular intervals and ensuring mastery in the subject.
2. West JB. Thoughts on teaching physiology to medical students in 2002. Physiologist 45: 389–393, 2002.
3. Fyrenius A, Silen C, Wirell S. Students’ conceptions of underlying principles in medical physiology: an interview study of medical students’ understanding in a PBL curriculum. Adv Physiol Educ 31: 364–369, 2007.
4. Michael J. What makes physiology hard for students to learn? Results of a faculty survey. Adv Physiol Educ 31: 34–40, 2007.
5. Flexner, A., editor. Medical Education in the United States and Canada: A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boston: Merrymount Press; 1910.
6. Matheson C. The educational value and effectiveness of lectures. Clin Teach 5: 218–221, 2008.
7. Dent, J., editor. Lectures: A practical guide for medical teachers. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
8. Fleming ND, Mills C. Not another Inventory, Rather a Catalyst for reflection. To Improve the Academy. 1992; 11:137–155.
9. Harden R. AMEE Guide 21: curriculum mapping: a tool for transport and authentic teaching and learning. Evaluation the outcome of underground medical education. Medical Education. 2003; 37: 580 -81.
10. KalpanaErnest,K.N.Anand,NaliniKanagasabapathy,SujithJ.Chandy, Alice Kuruvilla, and Molly Thomas., Patient Oriented Problem Solving (Pops) Approach And Audiovisual Aided (Ava) Lectures In Teaching Pharmacology – A Comparative Study. Indian Journal of Pharmacology, 30: 97-101, (1998).
11. SamataK.Padaki,AmrutA.Dambal,Physiologyteachingmethods:An evaluation by 150 medical students admitted in the first batch of Gadag Institute of Medical Sciences, GADAG. Indian Journal of Basic and Applied Medical Research; June 2017: Vol.-6, Issue- 3, P. 72-77
12. BryantJ,SenR,SoodSK.Undergraduatemedicalstudents’perceptions and opinions towards the subject of Physiology. IJBAR 2014; 5(12):605- 608.
Copyright (c) 2018 International Archives of BioMedical and Clinical Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.