Changes in student evaluations of a medical ethics class 3 years later

Abstract

Aims: The present study investigated changes in the student evaluations of a medical ethics class after studying in dental school for an additional 3 years.Materials and Methods: A problem-based learning medical ethics class in which students discuss the “right to death with dignity” using video material as a trigger was offered to third-year students at the School of Dentistry. At the end of the class, each student submitted a report describing their own opinions of the ethical questions raised as well as their impression of the class. Three years later, the same students were surveyed regarding cognitive changes in class evaluations. The changes in class evaluations were statistically analyzed with reference to the contents of the initial report (P < 0.05). Results: Student evaluations of the class rose 3 years later. One reason for the evaluation rise was considered to be the growth in their reflection capacity during additional years of learning experience in the dental school. Students whose report demonstrated that they were engaged by the ethical dilemma tended to raise their evaluation of the class. On the other hand, students who mentioned the difficulty of the task or the shocking images in the video material in their initial report did not raise their evaluation later. Thus, students’ perception of the task or setting in the class appeared to have a continuing effect on their evaluation. Conclusion: The results confirmed that student evaluations of a class would change after additional years of learning experience.

Keywords

Medical ethics - professionalism - reflection

Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

• References

• 1 Husain M, Khan S. Students’ feedback: An effective tool in teachers’ evaluation system. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 2016;6:178-81.
• 2 Algozzine B, Gretes J, Flowers C, Howley L, Beattie J, Spooner F, et al. Student evaluation of college teaching: A practice in search of principles. Coll Teach 2004;52:134-41.
• 3 Chen Y, Hoshower LB. Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness: An assessment of student perception and motivation. Assess Eval High Educ 2003;28:71-8.
• 4 Kember D, Leung DY, Kwan KP. Does the use of student feedback 8. Questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching? Assess Eval High Educ 2002;27:411-25.
• 5 Ramsden P. A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The course experience questionnaire. Stud High Educ 1991;16:129-50.
• 6 Grillo AC, Murdoch-Kinch CA, Ramaswamy V, Inglehart MR. Student evaluations of teaching: Dental and dental hygiene students’ and faculty members’ perspectives. J Dent Educ 2016;80:439-51.
• 7 Nasser F, Fresko B. Faculty views of student evaluation of college teaching. Assess Eval High Educ 2002;27:187-98.
• 8 Greimel-Fuhrmann B, Geyer A. Students’ evaluation of teachers and instructional quality-Analysis of relevant factors based on empirical evaluation research. Assess Eval High Educ 2003;28:229-38.
• 9 Shevlin M, Banyard P, Davies M, Griffiths M. The validity of student evaluation of teaching in higher education: Love me, love my lectures? Assess Eval High Educ 2000;25:397-405.
• 10 Attiyeh R, Lumsden KG. Some modern myths in teaching economics: The U. K. experience. Am Econ Rev 1972;62:429-33.
• 11 Centra JA. Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work? Res High Educ 2003;44:495-518.
• 12 Clayson DE, Haley DA. Student evaluations in marketing: What is actually being measured? J Mark Educ 1990;12:9-17.
• 13 Clayson DE. Student evaluations of teaching: Are they related to what students learn? A meta-analysis and review of the literature. J Mark Educ 2009;31:16-30.
• 14 Kordts-Freudinger R, Geithner E. When mode does not matter: Evaluation in class versus out of class. Educ Res Eval 2013;319:605-14.
• 15 Hilton SR, Slotnick HB. Proto-professionalism: How professionalisation occurs across the continuum of medical education. Med Educ 2005;39:58-65.
• 16 Maudsley G, Strivens J. Promoting professional knowledge, experiential learning and critical thinking for medical students. Med Educ 2000;34:535-44.
• 17 Cruess RL, Cruess SR, Steinert Y. Teaching Medical Professionalism. 1st ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
• 18 Maynard B. My Right to Death with Dignity at 29. CNN International Edition; 2014. Available from: http://www.edition.cnn.com/2014/10/07/opinion/maynard-assisted-suicide-cancer-dignity/. [Last accessed on 2016 Dec 07].
• 19 Azer SA. Twelve tips for creating trigger images for problem-based learning cases. Med Teach 2007;29:93-7.
• 20 Chan LK, Patil NG, Chen JY, Lam JC, Lau CS, Ip MS Advantages of video trigger in problem-based learning. Med Teach 2010;32:760-5.
• 21 Dent JA, Harden RM. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers. 4th. ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2013.