Submission ID 78122
| Code | P72 |
|---|---|
| At the end of this workshop, participants will be able to: | |
| Category | Medical Education |
| Type | Oral |
| Will the presenter be a: | Resident |
| Title | Is Student Evaluation of Teaching Valid? Experiences From Undergraduate Medical Student Society Delivered Virtual Teaching on Ecgs |
| Background/Purpose | The delivery of medical education has largely changed to an online format due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Student evaluation of teaching (SET) has become increasingly important over the last decade and is utilised for faculty hiring and promotion in many institutions. Peer versus student perception of teaching is widely researched, with differences in outcomes attributed to factors including teacher age, gender and presentation style. Through delivering a series of sessions by a single provider and delivery method (Zoom), most variables are eliminated. We wanted to understand the quality and validity of the feedback given. |
| Methods | This Clinical Diagnostic series included five teaching sessions over four weeks, which were advertised via Facebook. Two sessions were specific to ECGs and the others involved head CT, chest and orthopaedic radiographic interpretation. A simple feedback form was used and the data extracted and anonymised. The key questions asked were participants' perception of pre- and post-session knowledge. The same presenter was used to control for the variables mentioned above. |
| Results | Between 200-300 people attended each session, the majority of whom completed the feedback form. Broadly, pre- and post-knowledge for every session was similar. Interestingly, this consistency was also observed in feedback analysed for ECG-1 and ECG-2. Post ECG-1, knowledge was approximately 4 out of 5. However, participants attending ECG-2 after ECG-1 had pre-session knowledge of 3, where this was anticipated to have been higher. |
| Discussion | It was hypothesised that students' pre-session knowledge for ECG-2 would be higher than that of ECG-1. However, there was no significant difference in knowledge outcomes for those that attended both ECG sessions or those who attended only one; neither was there a significant difference when compared to the other three sessions. This calls into question the validity of SET and further work is needed to explore this anomaly. |
| Keyword 1 | Evaluation |
| Keyword 2 | Online Learning |
| Keyword 3 | |
| Abstract content most relevant to: (check all that apply) | Undergraduate Medical Education |
| Abstract Track - First Choice | Distributed Medical Education |
| Authors | Sarah Edwards Phyllida Roe Zoe Hinchcliffe Jamie Scriven |
