Homogenization of Lessons and Materials in Different Teaching Units in Obstetrics and Gynecology: A Quasi-Experimental Study
Resumo
Objective: To evaluate the impact of standardizing lessons and materials across different teaching units in obstetrics and gynecology on students’ satisfaction, perceived exam preparation adequacy, and the necessity for content standardization. Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted over two semesters with fourth-year medical students. In the first semester, faculty members from four teaching units independently designed their lessons and materials. In the second semester, standardized teaching materials were implemented across all units. Student perceptions were assessed through surveys measuring content relevance, satisfaction, exam preparation adequacy, and perceived discrepancies in teaching materials. Results: A total of 180 students participated in the first semester, and 184 in the second semester. Students in the first semester, where faculty had autonomy, reported higher satisfaction and a better perception of exam preparation adequacy (80.0 vs. 72.5, p < 0.001). The percentage of students perceiving discrepancies in teaching materials decreased after standardization (63.3% vs. 57.6%, p = 0.264). However, the proportion of students considering standardization necessary declined significantly (94.4% vs. 57.1%, p < 0.001). Additionally, nine students in the second semester rated satisfaction below 5, compared to none in the first semester (p = 0.004). Conclusions: The study suggests that while standardization improves content consistency, it may reduce student satisfaction and perceived exam preparation adequacy. A rigid standardization model may not fully address students' learning needs. A hybrid approach, balancing standardization with faculty autonomy, could optimize educational outcomes in medical training.
Downloads
Metrics
-
Resumo173
-
pdf 90
Referências
Fernández-Rodríguez CA, Arenas-Fenollar MC, Lacruz-Pérez I, Tárraga-Mínguez R. Teaching Methods in Medical Education: An Analysis of the Assessments and Preferences of Students. Sustainability. 2023; 15(11): 9044. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15119044
Barber JRG, Park SE, Jensen K, et al. Facilitators and barriers to teaching undergraduate medical students in general practice. Med Educ. 2019; 53. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13882
Law M, Veinot P, Mylopoulos M, Bryden P, Brydges R. Applying activity theory to undergraduate medical curriculum reform: Lessons in contradictions from multiple stakeholders’ perspectives. Med Teach. 2022; 44. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2041190
Neufeld A, Malin G. Exploring the relationship between medical student basic psychological need satisfaction, resilience, and well-being: A quantitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2019; 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1847-9
Bacro TRH, Gebregziabher M, Fitzharris TP. Evaluation of a lecture recording system in a medical curriculum. Anat Sci Educ. 2010; 3. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.183
Khanna P, Roberts C, Lane AS. Designing health professional education curricula using systems thinking perspectives. BMC Med Educ. 2021; 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02442-5
Khalil MK, Wright WS, Spearman KA, Gaspard AC. Relationship between students’ perceptions of the adequacy of M1 and M2 curricula and their performance on USMLE step 1 examination. BMC Med Educ. 2019; 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1796-3
Kopel J, Brower G, Culberson JW. Teaching methods fostering enjoyment and creativity in medical education. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect. 2021; 11. https://doi.org/10.1080/20009666.2021.1979739
Green MJ, Myers K, Watson K, Czerwiec M, Shapiro D, Draus S. Creativity in Medical Education: The Value of Having Medical Students Make Stuff. J Med Humanit. 2016; 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-016-9397-1
Burgess A, Mellis C. Engaging Medical Students in the Basic Science Years with Clinical Teaching. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2015; 2. https://doi.org/10.4137/jmecd.s18921
Hew KF, Lo CK. Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: A meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ. 2018; 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z
Julian K, Appelle N, O’Sullivan P, Morrison EH, Wamsley M. The impact of an objective structured teaching evaluation on faculty teaching skills. Teach Learn Med. 2012; 24: 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2012.641476
Huamán-Tapia E, Almanza-Cabe RB, Sairitupa-Sanchez LZ, et al. Critical Thinking, Generalized Anxiety in Satisfaction with Studies: The Mediating Role of Academic Self-Efficacy in Medical Students. Behav Sci. 2023; 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13080665
Ho YR, Chen BY, Li CM. Thinking more wisely: using the Socratic method to develop critical thinking skills amongst healthcare students. BMC Med Educ. 2023; 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04134-2
Direitos de Autor (c) 2025 Serviço de Publicações da Universidade de Múrcia
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Licença Internacional Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0.
Os trabalhos publicados nesta revista estão sujeitos aos seguintes termos:
1. O Serviço de Publicações da Universidade de Murcia (o editor) preserva os direitos económicos (direitos de autor) das obras publicadas e favorece e permite a sua reutilização ao abrigo da licença de utilização indicada no ponto 2.
2. Os trabalhos são publicados sob uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-NãoDerivada 4.0.
3. Condições de autoarquivamento. Os autores estão autorizados e incentivados a divulgar eletronicamente as versões pré-impressas (versão antes de ser avaliada e enviada à revista) e / ou pós-impressas (versão avaliada e aceita para publicação) de seus trabalhos antes da publicação, desde que favorece sua circulação e difusão mais precoce e com ela possível aumento de sua citação e alcance junto à comunidade acadêmica.
