Dear All,
I wanted to ask everyone a question about
an idea we are playing with here. With the volume of material the students
need to prepare for this intensive Duke-NUS medical school basic science
curriculum, it is sometimes so very difficult for them to be certain they have
focused on the right content and at the right level until after the GRA section.
They feel a bit demoralized at their “relatively” low IRA scores.
Some of our faculty (not all) do believe that the students learn so much from
the GRA part, but there is no real way to be 100% certain. If the IRA is
partially designed to ensure individual accountability, but you have a group
who is highly motivated to be accountable and your goal is that they actually
learn it the material what would be your thoughts on reversing them sometimes?
I also thought it would help the students to work as a team better in their
learning – as sometimes they just study on their own and don’t really
take full advantage of the power of group study (and sometimes they just don’t
have time or want someone there to ask questions when the group cannot answer
it).
What if we gave a comprehensive closed
book GRA – have the groups teach, learn, question together to get the
answers and then do a more focused, closed book IRA on similar (but obviously
changed) questions to see if they, as individuals, get it?
Many of our faculty here are not completely
convinced that ALL the individuals are learning in the groups, thus are
skeptical of the use of the group scores to be added to student’s overall
scores. We want to explore ways, beyond or in addition to the regular end of
module exams and standardized exams, to demonstrate that they actually have
learned in the group process.
Thoughts, comments?
Sandy
***************************************
Sandy COOK, PhD | Associate Dean, Curriculum Development |
Administrative Executive: