Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Using Learning Outcome Measures to assess Doctoral Nursing Education
Published on: June 21, 2010
Matching medical student achievement to learning objectives and outcomes: a paradigm shift for an implemented
Ihab Shafek Atta1, Fahd Nasser AlQahtani2
1Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (Assuit Branch), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Introduction:
Low student achievement in a basic imaging module was the impetus for an assessment of the module.
Methods:
A valid, reliable, and structured Likert scale was designed to measure the degree of student satisfaction with the domains of the module, including learning objectives (LO), teaching strategy and tools (TT), assessment tools (AT), and allotted credit hours (CH). Further analysis was conducted of student dissatisfaction to determine the subdomain in which module improvement was to be implemented. Statistical analysis of data among Likert scale domains was conducted.
Results:
Likert scale data showed the TT domain to be the major reason for low student achievement. Statistical studies revealed 57/117 students (48.6%) were dissatisfied with TT, compared with LO 16/117 (13.6%), AT 54/117 (46.1%), and CH 12/117 (10.2%). Significant P-values were obtained for LO vs TT (P<0.0001), LO vs AT (P<0.0001), LO vs CH (P<0.03), TT vs CH (P<0.0001), and AT vs CH (P<0.0001). No significant difference was observed between TT and AT (P<0.29). Regarding TT, 41/117 (34.9%) students were dissatisfied with lectures (L) compared to hospital-based teaching (HPT) 24/117 (20%), problem-based learning (PBL) 8/117 (6.8%), self-directed learning (SDL) 3/117 (2.5%), and seminars (S) 4/117 (3.4%). Significant P-values were obtained for L vs HPT (P<0.0001), L vs PBL (P<0.0001), L vs SDL (P<0.0001), L vs S (P<0.0001), HPT vs PBL (P<0.002), HPT vs SDL (P<0.0001), and HPT vs S (P<0.0001). Regarding lecture modifications, student satisfaction was 78.3% compared to 52% before modification. A significant P-value (P<0.0001) was obtained between Likert scale domains before and after modification. Lecture modification resulted in a good student response and satisfaction.
Conclusion:
The major reason for low student achievement was the teaching tools, particularly the lectures. Major modifications to lectures improved student achievement. The students and most of the teaching staff were highly satisfied with the modifications, which provided for reciprocal discussion and interaction. These results should encourage and guide other medical schools to investigate the points of weakness in their curriculum.
More Related Videos
13:44Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
10:17Improving Student Outcomes with an Adaptable Molecular Cloning Course-Based Undergraduate Research Experience
Published on: November 15, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching II: Planning and Implementation
Sign Test for Matched Pairs
To conduct the sign test, we first calculate the differences in...
Student t Distribution
The Student t distribution was developed by William S. Goset (1876–1937) of the...
Microsoft Excel: Student's t-Test
To conduct a t-test in Excel, use the T.TEST function or the "Data...
Nursing Implementation
The five steps to implementing effective nursing care include reassessing the patient, reviewing and revising the existing nursing care plan, organizing the resources and care delivery, anticipating and preventing complications, and implementing nursing interventions.
Predicting Reaction Outcomes