Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
By Shyam Indrakanti
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Please click on the Section, Sub-Section or Page Number to be automatically directed to it.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ____________________________________________________ 1
Abstract ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 1
Noteworthy Findings __________________________________________________________________________________ 1
Short-Term Recommendations __________________________________________________________________________ 3
Long-Term Recommendations __________________________________________________________________________ 3
INTRODUCTION _________________________________________________________ 5
METHODS _____________________________________________________________ 6
A qualitative Approach ________________________________________________________________________________ 6
Method of Data Collection _____________________________________________________________________________ 6
Method of Analysis ____________________________________________________________________________________ 8
Numerical Analysis ___________________________________________________________________________________ 9
Testing Validity and Reliability of Qualitative Data ________________________________________________________ 9
CONCLUSION __________________________________________________________ 37
REFERENCES __________________________________________________________ 38
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS __________________________________________________ 39
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ABSTRACT
Perhaps the most pressing issue for instructors when considering updates or changes to
curriculum is student feedback. Course-Evaluations help address changes to individual courses
but feedback regarding the curriculum as a whole is sparse. With 74.4% participation, 117 unique
responses and a clear model of analysis, this survey hopes to provide a preliminary look at how
some students in the class of 2017 perceived the first year curriculum in UCLAs School of
dentistry. Data was gathered through face to face interviews, focus group interviews and survey
responses. Each of these gathering methods utilized an ice-breaker question, followed by several
open ended questions attempting to keep bias to a minimum. For the interviews, questions had
several levels of probes that were used by the surveyor to delve deeper into relevant topics. This
data was then recorded by the surveyor and analyzed according to the precepts of grounded
theory generating 5 themes, connecting them with each other and drawing recommendations
out of this analysis. Provided here is data from students on both didactic and pre-clinical
curriculum, explaining what aspects of these courses are well received and some
recommendations to improve upon practices that arent as well received. Student response was
overwhelming in quantity and overwhelmingly constructive in nature with a predominantly
positive tone to their comments.
NOTEWORTHY FINDINGS
TABLE 1 THEMES AND NUMBER OF COMMENTS
THEME
NUMBER OF COMMENTS
Didactic Relevance
171
Didactic Activities
73
Didactic Organization
154
178
164
Pre-Clinical Relevance
84
Pre-Clinical Activities
219
Pre-Clinical Organization
143
63
173
Table of Contents
Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Didactic Courses Recommendations are mostly small requests, mainly surrounding
lecture presentations, but effective improvements when implemented. These have been shown
in certain courses but could be beneficial if incorporated in most.
o Creating and organizing information to make it conducive to learning
o Making material available early and of the appropriate length for the allotted time
o Use of concluding slides and highlighting in presentations to underscore
important material
o Preventing fragmentation of data and facts presented in lecture by making them
consistent for the entire course especially in courses with multiple instructors
lecturing
o Organization of courses by themes or blocks to group relevant topics together
o Offer more learning experiences like case discussions which allow students to
apply the knowledge they learn in lecture.
Preclinical Laboratory Courses Most suggestions for these courses revolve around
laboratory sessions. Some suggestions have been recommended for lectures in these classes
regarding how best to convey material that has to be interactively experienced in the
conventionally passive lecture format.
o Calibration of bench instructors, clear stating of guidelines for clinical competence
that are adhered to by all instructors, and standardization of grading
o Use of videos or animations in lecture and in-person laboratory demonstrations
enhancing learning for audio and visual learners more directly.
o Attributes effective bench instructors possess proactive in identifying areas
where students need help, supportive of students who struggle, encouraging
more out of students who excel, impartial to all students at a bench, efficient with
time when offering help to students, technically proficient and knowledgeable,
unperturbed when needing to verify guidelines for laboratory procedures if
unsure.
o Making reference materials, such as lectures from previous years, available to
introduce armamentarium earlier. This would help foreshadow what is to come in
current courses and helps students integrate techniques from various courses or
quarters and learn cumulatively.
Table of Contents
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SHORT-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS
In the immediate future, some goals this survey outlined include:
o Didactic courses providing more opportunities to apply knowledge gained CBLs,
Summary questions at the end of lectures, whenever possible
o Improve lecture presentation via proper pacing, offering more targeted
highlighting, and explanatory notes as necessary.
o Assess the need and scope of current special guest lectures in both didactic and
pre-clinical laboratory courses either to expand or curtail as needed
o Laboratory courses offering more standardized grading and clearer classification
of errors for examination and clinical purposes
o More usage of visual elements in laboratory courses (videos and demonstrations)
and better integration of available technology/equipment to enhance learning
Mostly these could be established and achieved through the Faculty Development committee,
Curriculum Enhancement committee, and Curriculum committee.
LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS
On a larger scale, these are some recommendations to enhance the already high
academic standards at UCLA and facilitate fruitful student-instructor interactions:
o Establish a forum for open discussions regarding curriculum with course chairs.
This would hopefully create the tone of mutual respect that is absolutely
necessary in student-instructor interactions
o Arrange for comprehensive student feedback to be gathered and analyzed such
that it would be ready for curriculum enhancement purposes
o Work towards incorporating some of the suggestions and recommendations
presented here into applicable courses per the discretion of course chairs and
section chairs.
These goals are not however solely the responsibility of the faculty, students realize that
this is a combined effort if progress is to be achieved this report demonstrates that students
are eager to offer their opinions just as faculty have always been receptive to it. Since we are all
affected by it, we are all willing to contribute to the academic character of our school
Table of Contents
Page 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This survey and the efforts put forth by participating members in the class of 2017 are to
ensure there is some information about what this group of students would like to see addressed.
This is an attempt to engage the faculty in a constructive and positive way and try to establish a
forum for discussions of this sort. With the overwhelming amount of work, suggestions on
making the workload more manageable or more productive will naturally arise on the student
front. Similarly, multiple faculty members have expressed that they too would like to enhance
curriculum yet they are left to simply guess what students would find agreeable. Bridging this gap
could be very mutually beneficial to both the teachers and the learners.
Table of Contents
Page 4
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Rapid changes in the modes available for the delivery of information and incorporation
of these changes into teaching strategies may create differences among generations in ways to
enhance learning and teaching. Since students and faculty are receptive and motivated
individuals who want to disseminate and accumulate information respectively, we continue to
critically examine the best practices available in an effort to collectively address these
differences. This survey is a student effort to provide commentary, acknowledgement and
recognition of the range of our learning experiences during UCLA School of Dentistry's first year
curriculum. The intent is to highlight some of the amazing techniques in teaching that faculty
members have created, expanded and embraced while simultaneously providing students a
sense of catharsis in discussing and reflecting upon an academically challenging and intellectually
stimulating time in their lives.
This was a qualitative study that used student responses to probing questions, followed
by an analysis that was both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Information has been
organized into 5 major themes and then further divided into subthemes to provide targeted
feedback for instructor review. Where necessary, context has been provided for any analysis
done and the positive/negative comment system has been explained accordingly. These themes
were then interconnected by similarities or types of comments made by students to draw
recommendations and suggestions that could be passed on to faculty members. The goal is to
provide usable student sourced data to faculty members regarding student perspectives on
curriculum - both in the content and organizational domains.
Faculty members have expressed that they require honest feedback to alter their
teaching if and when necessary. Course evaluations and other forms of feedback may provide
information targeted to specific courses but they do not provide usable data that addresses the
curriculum as a whole. There may also be charged, inflammatory or simply undiscernible remarks
that detract from the general effort of enhancing curriculum in course evaluations. This survey
hopes to provide instructors with feedback from a large proportion of students from one class.
The data gathered was analyzed and organized to be accessible, then the entire document and
all claims within were verified by students. The intent is to evaluate and respond to the question
"What elements and practices employed by instructors in the academic year of 2013-2014 in the
first year curriculum were most appreciated by students and why?" Ultimately, not only is it
necessary to highlight the most liked teaching practices, but also the reason why. Hopefully, this
facilitates more careful consideration of any information presented.
Table of Contents
Page 5
METHODS
METHODS
A QUALITATIVE APPROACH
Since the main impetus for conducting focus group discussions is to understand student
concerns regarding curriculum and provide genuine feedback from students, a qualitative
approach was necessary. An inquiry such as this where the perceptions of individuals will
heavily influence the data gathered, needs to be analyzed carefully and without bias.
Therefore, this phenomenological approach was focused on understanding the lived
experiences of participants involved (Denzin et al 2000). This was done to provide full,
detailed descriptions of the phenomenon [Student-Instructor interactions] under study (Miles
et al 1994)
The information gathered here was provided voluntarily, with the participants knowing
fully well that there was no faculty oversight in acquiring this information in short, all who
participated were being candid and all of the issues raised were done so in a constructive
fashion.
METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION
In the 3 weeks that concluded the summer quarter of 2014, 7 meetings were
conducted and a total of 57 students were present at the focus group interviews. At each of
the meetings, food was provided to the participants, partially to thank them for their efforts in
providing feedback and partially to incentivize others to come participate. Students who
participated did so of their own volition, and contributed as little or as much to the discussion
as they saw fit.
The data for this report was compiled from 2 main sources in person focus group
interviews and questionnaire responses. A focus group for this exercise consisted of 5-12
students in a semi-structured 50 minute interview spending 25 minutes discussing didactic
courses and 25 minutes discussing laboratory courses. The discussions were relatively open
ended with questions that were followed up by more focused probes for important or crucial
points of discussion. The surveyor noted key points of discussion, the frequency with which
they were brought up along with verbatim quotes all of which would be incorporated into the
analysis. (Merriam S. 1998)
Before the interviews, participants were sent a short questionnaire to fill out and
return. This allowed the participants to come into the focus groups with a sense of what would
be discussed and how best to express their ideas. It also allowed the surveyor to hold a
directed discussion and obtain a higher proportion of usable data (Hesse-Biber et al 2006). The
questionnaire has been reproduced below. Responses to these questions were used in order to
Table of Contents
Page 6
METHODS
compile this report. Nearly all the questions were constructed to provide relevant data.
(Maxwell J. 2005)
TABLE 2 QUESTIONNAIRE
#
1.
2.
3.
QUESTION
Pick 2 words to describe your experience during your first year in the school of dentistry.
In your Fall quarter classes, what elements made these classes particularly engaging or effective
in learning the material?
How about Winter quarter and Spring quarter classes?
8.
What was your experience like in your laboratory courses versus your didactic courses? Do you
feel the lab courses and didactic courses complemented each other?
What were the least effective elements of classes (or teaching/instruction) that made it hard
for you to learn or stay engaged?
Were there certain aspects of courses that were too easy? In what sense? How could you
modify these courses to make it a more meaningful learning experience?
After your first quarter of lab instruction, how comfortable were you working with the handpiece? How about hand instruments? Do you feel you began to develop dexterity?
Was the curriculum in spring relevant to your development as a student dentist?
9.
How prepared did you feel entering the second year of dental school?
10.
What are 3 things that you feel could be improved upon in UCLA SOD?
4.
5.
6.
7.
11.
12.
What are 3 things you feel UCLA SOD has done extremely well towards your personal
enrichment?
How receptive do you think the faculty members are when it comes to listening to the students
A total of 64 students weighed in and 117 unique responses were collected. For
reference, the class of 2017 had 86 students in the summer session thus 74.4% of the
students participated in one form or another. Below is a tabulated summary of participation.
TOTAL PARTICIPANTS
TOTAL RESPONSES
57
57
57
53
57
110
64
117
23
64
117
Table of Contents
Page 7
METHODS
METHOD OF ANALYSIS
All data was gathered by September 15th and it was analyzed according to grounded
theory and the 3 types of coding described within (Corbin and Strauss 2007). This is very similar
to method of analysis Dr. Minh Tran and Genevieve Cedillo are using to analyze student course
evaluations as presented at the Faculty Retreat 2014. The responses and comments are divided
into 2 broad categories - Didactic and Pre-Clinical. The comments in each category are then
organized into 5 major themes where they were then further broken into numerous sub
themes for the sake of organizing the information. The intention is to allow faculty members to
access the portion of the report most relevant to them without having to read this report in its
entirety.
In table 4 below, the 5 themes have been listed along with brief descriptions. Also
highlighted are which questionnaire questions provided the most data for a specific theme.
TABLE 4 THEMES AND QUESTIONS
THEME
Relevance
Activities
Organization
Dissemination
of Information
Testing and
Grading
DESCRIPTION OF THEME
Students often ask "Why do I need to know _____?" or "I wish I
had known ____." Subthemes here will deal exclusively with
techniques that identify information as relevant or practices
that have been successfully used to impress upon students how
certain knowledge is pertains to their growth and career
development
This theme and its subthemes are purely about certain activities
that students found either beneficial or detrimental to their
learning and which elements of these exercises contributed to
this.
Subthemes within are points raised about how courses were
organized and how lectures/presentations were structured.
There is also discussion here about some wonderful practices
certain course-chairs or lecturers used of which students were
greatly appreciative.
As the theme implies, topics of discussion are limited to how
information is presented and what techniques really resonated
with students.
The final theme may be the most contentious one, but it is also
very important to students since it measures their
performance. It is, presumably, equally important to instructors
since it allows them to reaffirm or reassess their approach
according to student performance. Subthemes in this category
relate to how certain testing techniques have been received by
students and what students have expressed about grading
practices.
RELEVANT QUESTIONS
# 2,3,7,8,9
# 4,6,10,11
# 2,3,4,5
# 2,4,7,8,12
# 5,6,9,10,11
Table of Contents
Page 8
METHODS
Within these themes, subthemes were generated via a second level of open coding
(Corbin and Strauss 2007). In the data analysis section subthemes have quotes of varying
lengths to explain what the subtheme pertains to. There is also commentary that is a
composite of student responses presented in interviews or in questionnaire responses. To
identify which comments pertained to a sub-theme, axial coding (Corbin and Strauss 2007) was
used to label and group them. Lastly, selective coding (Corbin and Strauss 2007) was used to
draw recommendations and suggestions that could be passed on to relevant committees and
administrators to bring about enhancements to the curriculum as presented here.
NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
Since this was an endeavor in ascertaining subjective information that was analyzed
qualitatively by a student author, there is an attempt to provide some numerical data to
facilitate an objective approach in recognizing which points are the most important or pressing
for students. Questionnaire responses and discussions were carefully reviewed and comments
were classified as either positive or negative in relation to the commentary associated with
each sub theme - if a different criterion was used to classify comments it has been explicitly
stated. Context has also been provided if the positive and negative classification oversimplifies
the responses. The numerical analysis may also facilitate in determining what action, if any,
needs to be taken and which practices, if any, need to either be inculcated or avoided. Since
this is pertaining to elements of effective teaching, names of individuals or courses have been
eliminated - regardless of their mention being in a positive or negative light.
TESTING VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF QUALITATIVE DATA
Lastly, in order to test the veracity of the claims presented this report, data was
triangulated by utilizing information from multiple sources student interviews, questionnaire
responses and discussions with faculty members. Since the themes and subthemes were
established based on converging several sources of data or perspective it adds to the validity
of the study (Corbin and Strauss 2007).
Once a preliminary draft was compiled with completed data analysis, 7 students 6
participants and 1 upperclassman were selected to review the findings. The 6 participants
were chosen because their questionnaire responses were extremely detailed and
comprehensive, while the upperclassman was chosen due to his role as a representative of the
entire student body. Their primary objective in doing so was to keep the contents of this report
as free from author bias as possible and confirm the claims within were representative of those
students made in the focus groups. Furthermore, some faculty members were also kind
enough to review the preliminary draft once again with the intention to scrutinize the claims
presented here and judge whether they are representative of those commonly made by the
student body. Through this process most of the themes or subthemes were not altered in any
Student Perspectives on Instruction and Curriculum
Table of Contents
Page 9
METHODS
significant way. However, some subthemes were abridged in light of institutional changes and
context provided by institutional history disclosed by faculty members. In other cases, more
quotes or expanded commentary were implemented to clarify a specific point of discussion
that was raised in the interviews or questionnaire responses. The use of member checking to
determine the accuracy of the qualitative findings can also add to the validity of the
findings.
Table of Contents
Page 10
NUMBER OF COMMENTS
Didactic Relevance
171
Didactic Activities
73
Didactic Organization
154
178
164
DISCLAIMER
The data provided here has been acquired through student feedback. Direct quotes come
from responses while commentary is a composite of student responses provided. Some of the
recommended practices may seem familiar to instructors if their classes had certain elements
experience positively by surveyed individuals. Not all of the themes and subthemes may pertain
to every course. Some courses may already be incorporating some of the things suggested below.
The information is meant to cover a broad range of topics across the didactic curriculum it is
not targeted at any individuals, courses or tracks in particular.
RELEVANCE
Table of Contents
Page 11
Table of Contents
Page 12
Table of Contents
Page 13
ACTIVITIES
Table of Contents
Page 14
Table of Contents
Page 15
a. What methods for organizing lecture PPTs/PDFs did students find agreeable?
"You remember Dr. Xs slides? [she] started with a list of things and got through all of it
by the end... [It was] like a 'table of contents'"
One of the presentation techniques that was universally praised is the use of organizing
slides. For instance, if there is a lecture encompassing multiple topics, lecturers will
already split the presentation by topic, or even subtopics. However this can all be put
together with a few well organized slides that shows a list of topics/subtopics in the order
they are covered. In particular, the example most commonly brought up had the lecturer
reuse this slide while highlighting the relevant topic or subtopic as we moved along
through the lecture. A different approach to this is the use of specialized hyperlinked
PowerPoint or PDF files which allow seamless navigation to the information as the
student needs. Others chose to simply split their lecture files by topic and made their
presentations based on topic rather than the allotted lecture time.
Some students were also mentioning how if updated or changed after the lecture,
new files should be updated to Angel reflecting these changes a lack of this can
truly detract from the learning experience.
Positive - 49 ; Negative - 0
Focus group mentions - 7
Table of Contents
Page 16
Some students found the notes section to be distracting or daunting if every slide
had a large notes section in a presentation.
Some students also realize not all professors and lecturers like PowerPoint software.
However, they were equally favorable to lecturers who supplemented their
presentation material with handouts that explained diagrams from their respective
PPT or PDF lecture files. In particular the example of one lecturer came up often
who labelled each diagram in his PPT files and explained them clearly in his
handouts - a practice that was praised every time it was brought up in a group.
Positive - 24 ; Negative - 3
Focus group mentions - 4
Table of Contents
Page 17
DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
Table of Contents
Page 18
c. What is the biggest drawback to having multiple lecturers for each topic?
"Dr. X says this and Dr. Y says that"
Students fully realize and understand that the world of science is never static. As such
information doesn't stagnate or remain unchanging for an appreciable amount of time especially the cutting edge information that is regularly presented to students by
pioneers in their fields. Old paradigms are replaced with newer ones and different fields
learn of and utilize this information differently. This is especially the case when a course is
integrative in nature and has a myriad accomplished scientists, researchers and clinicians
Table of Contents
Page 19
Table of Contents
Page 20
a. Is the use of the TLC or computer labs preferred by students as a test taking
medium?
"It's not that I don't like computers but"
While taking a test at TLC seems like an ideal solution to a standard paper test, there are
some severe limitations that students commented on. Positive comments included the ease
of use of the software, fairness in time allotted, significantly more detailed pictures when
applicable and the possibility of instantly getting ones score. Negative comments were far
more numerous and included the following
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
TLC computer system crash was anxiety inducing for those who faced this crisis. After
that it was anxiety inducing for all of us who had exams in TLC subsequently
Splitting the class into 2 groups and forcing one to stay the entire time doesn't
mitigate all of the concerns about academic integrity
Difficulty in proctoring since the students are spaced so far apart and proctors cannot
maintain line of sight effectively.
Software issues such as scrolling via a mouse leading to an unintentional answer
choice change. This also includes the few glitches where the system would display
scores immediately after the exam - something that brought equal amounts of
exhilaration and anxiety based on the score and the student who this happened to.
In general, if at all possible, avoiding administration of tests in the TLC would be preferred
by the majority of students consulted for this exercise. Students generally preferred the
older and more predictable, paper test format. With the change from Angel to Gryphon, it
seems the TLC is no longer viable. However, should the use of computer labs for test taking
arise, the aforementioned points may be worth consideration.
Positive - 29 ; Negative - 3
Focus group mentions 4
Table of Contents
Page 21
iii.
iv.
Each of these suggestions is currently used in one or more courses and it really
emphasizes self assessments as a means to explore the material and test proficiency. In
Table of Contents
Page 22
Table of Contents
Page 23
NUMBER OF COMMENTS
Pre-Clinical Relevance
84
Pre-Clinical Activities
219
Pre-Clinical Organization
143
63
173
DISCLAIMER
The data provided here has been acquired through student feedback. Direct quotes come
from responses while commentary is a composite of student responses provided. Some of the
recommended practices may seem familiar to instructors if their classes had certain elements
that were experienced positively by surveyed individuals. Not all of the themes and subthemes
may pertain to every course. Some courses may already be incorporating some of the things
suggested below. The information is meant to cover a broad range of topics across the pre-clinical
laboratory curriculum as they were brought up during the discussions students in the class of
2017 had. There is no intention here to targeted at any individuals, courses or tracks in particular.
RELEVANCE
Table of Contents
Page 24
Table of Contents
Page 25
a. What would be a good way to deal with transitions from one facility to the
next?
Student 1 : "going to A floor, then 4th floor in 10 minutes
Student 2: Sometimes its a lot of time and sometimes it just isnt enough!
The transition time from lecture to laboratory is something that was often brought up
by students. The concern is about how much valuable time is spent time that could give
students more interaction time with their bench instructors. In one of the laboratory
Table of Contents
Page 26
Table of Contents
Page 27
iii.
iv.
independently during demos or they were able to offer more concise critiques,
were spoken of very highly.
Some students also noted that when instructors had a very personable way of
communication, they were more appreciated. While they did concede that this
doesn't change the instructors ability to teach and the fact that each instructor has
a personality and tone they find most appropriate for teaching, they were truly
thankful to have had thoughtful and amiable instructors.
Students often noted that their instructors, when unsure of criteria for a specific lab
project, would speak to other instructors or course chairs. Students realize that
some of the bench instructors aren't familiar with the stringent requirements for
certain lab projects and this was a practice that most students viewed positively
one student also commented it shows the collaborative way dentists tackle
problems
Positive - 49; Negative - 2
Positive in this context support 2 or more of the 4 points brought up. Negative
refers to students who did not present even 1 of the 4 points above but did
comment on poor instructor interactions in lab.
Focus group mentions - 7
Table of Contents
Page 28
ORGANIZATION
Table of Contents
Page 29
ii.
Effective project planning Some instructors actively remind students where they
should be with a given project during certain points in a lab session. For example
some instructors would say finish the _____ first so that you can focus on ______
for the rest of the time. This is a practice that a lot of students found helpful. While
there were some who found this overbearing at times, most appreciated the timely
reminders. Some students mentioned how they had, at times, spent enormous
amounts of time on fruitless pursuits, when they could have been more careful and
allotted periods of time for each portion of a project.
Instructor time management By far, the most common organizational concern for
lab courses is how bench instructors handle their bench group. Some instructors are
very brief with their comments and provide high yield tips in mere moments. Other
instructors are very methodical and spend 20 minutes or more with each student.
While both of these methods were viewed as equally viable, students often prefer
the former since they generally want to see their bench instructor at multiple points
during the project. It is worth noting that instructors who spend larger amounts of
time with each student are noted for providing more comprehensive information. In
the same vein, students also voiced concerns over how instructors chose which
student to approach. In general, students vastly appreciated instructors who used a
way to organize how they dispensed help to students - be it a list followed
alphabetically, chronologically based on request or otherwise.
For the point about the order in which instructors assist students, most
participants conceded that this needs to be a joint effort between students
and instructors. While we are asking instructors to approach students in a
logical or organized fashion, students ought to respect the same logic and
organization equally - strictly adhering to whatever organizational rules a
bench instructor employs.
Positive - 55; Negative - 0
Focus group mentions - 7
Table of Contents
Page 30
Table of Contents
Page 31
Table of Contents
Page 32
c. Were there any suggestions regarding the lecture presentations for preclinical laboratory courses?
the lecture had 20 types of _____ materials, how and what do we use for _______it
makes sense when there is a recap of stuff at the end or a table"
The lecture components of laboratory courses are generally not the most demanding
didactic courses, yet they are certainly didactic in nature. As such, students found
organization of lecture material, using relevant in class interaction and other didactic
elements in these lectures. Some lab courses did employ in-class questions, summary
slides and other mainstays of didactic lectures. In short, students truly appreciated
lectures that had clearly outlined themes or concepts and orthodox organization with an
introductory portion outlining the objectives of the lecture and concluding with "take
home message" or summary slide.
Another request students wanted to make was regarding the updating of lecture
slides. In some cases the lecture slides were not uploaded to Angel or were updated
the day of lecture. In very few of these instances, students were presented quizzes
in lecture on material that was either updated or uploaded on the same day often
just a few minutes before the quiz. Students would like to avoid such a situation, it
at all possible. Conversely, students appreciate it immensely when lecture slides are
posted well in advance, a practice followed most of the time. This facilitated a more
careful look at the presented material prior to lecture.
Positive - 17; Negative - 7
Negative in context refers to the instance of lecture slides being posted late or
changed drastically.
Table of Contents
Page 33
Table of Contents
Page 34
Have the terms of designation defined very clearly - something that has been
done in some of the laboratory courses as a list of pre-requisites
ii.
If the requirements for Honors are stringent and not being achieved by the
established percentage, allowing a discretionary way for course chairs or
bench instructors to recognize students whose performance was deserving of
the designation - this is also a practice in one of the lab courses.
iii.
Allowing Honors designations for the various different portions of a laboratory
course. Effectively allowing Exemplary Performance Reports for didactic or
Laboratory portions that a student earned to be reflected on their transcripts
rather than being a note only available internally. This point was brought up
often since the different portions of these courses are graded independently
and even on GSD need to be entered independently.
iv.
Combine all aspects of a lab course into a single percent based grade where
most if not all projects are graded towards a final composite score - this is an
approach that one of the first year lab courses uses while keeping lab and
didactic portions separate but using percentages to establish grades. A second
year lab course uses a similar model but one where a percentage grade
encompasses every didactic and laboratory exercise.
Concerns about Honors arise because as explained in the similar subtheme in the
didactic portion, students are concerned about how their performance is being
evaluated. As has been stated several times, this is not an attempt to intrude upon
the territory of course chairs or administration, but rather a reflection of the various
points discussed. It is being presented here for faculty members who would like to
know what students are concerned about in terms of grading. It is also something
that students brought up several times.
Positive 29 ; Negative - 0
Focus group mentions 4
Table of Contents
Page 35
Table of Contents
Page 36
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
The question posed at the beginning of this analysis was "What elements and practices
employed by instructors in the academic year of 2013-2014 in the first year curriculum were
most appreciated by students and why?" As the data and analysis above shows, the most
appreciated elements are both numerous and not universally applicable. By demystifying
student perspectives and sharing their thoughts, participants from the class of 2017, have
articulated the most pressing matters for themselves and hope this data will be considered
when approaching curriculum enhancement.
Since curriculum is always changing, being reexamined and reevaluated, the aforementioned
data could provide a student perspective in what aspects need to be addressed and how they
might be handled. While student perspectives may not always concur with the goals of the
curriculum change or course objectives set by chairs, all changes to curriculum will effect
students and faculty members. Instructors, as the ones permitted to make changes, do so with
foreknowledge of how their proposed changes will affect the course; this document hopes to
provide some insights into how students, at least in the class of 2017, may perceive and receive
these effects. These efforts have been put forth due to our reverence for the learner-teacher
duality and an appreciation for the students and instructors who comprise it.
Table of Contents
Page 37
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. Strauss, A. & Corbin J., (2007) Qualitative Procedures. In A. Strauss & J. Corbin
(Eds.) Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd Ed. Chapter 9) Third Edition. SAGE
Publications
2. Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2000) Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of
qualitative Research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative
Research (2nd Ed. Pg 1-28). SAGE Publications
3. Miles, M.B. & Huberman A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An Expanded
Sourcebook (2nd Ed). SAGE Publications
4. Hesse-Biber, S. & Leavy, P. (2006) The Practice of Qualitative Research. SAGE
Publications
5. Maxwell J. (2005) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE
Publications, Inc. Multiple Identities, 45
6. Merriam S (1998) Qualitative research and case study applications in education.
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Table of Contents
Page 38
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank several faculty members who helped me by reading a preliminary draft
and offered input on various aspects of this paper. Their help was invaluable and I sincerely
appreciate it!
The following students helped verify the accuracy of the opinions and data presented here
after analysis was completed. They also provided their insights regarding how the present the
data to the student populace effectively. (Listed alphabetically by last name)
Anthony Fioretti
Jean Kang
Elies Kim
Kyle Low
Ogo Olele
Travis Steinberg
Amir Tadros
And last, but certainly not the least I must acknowledge the 64 members of the Class of 2017
who participated in this exercise. My peers were tremendously patient despite numerous
emails, announcements and reminders. They were also the ones who showed up in great
numbers despite midterm exams, final exams, quizzes and the academic burdens placed upon
all dental students. Thank you for your participation my dear classmates - though I cannot fully
express my gratitude nor thank you properly for your time and effort, I can only hope you
relished the food and shall revel in the cathartic and insightful discussions you helped make
possible! Your participation is a testament to our class commitment to serve the needs of our
school and a demonstration of the eclectic perspectives we possess as a group.
Table of Contents
Page 39