IADR Abstract Archives
Supporting First-year Students' Learning for Their Future Practice: Students' Experiences.
Objectives: Integrating learning within the context of students' future practice is strongly advocated in health professions education. As a result, integration of scientific components with clinic was a core curriculum aim for our revised curriculum, commencing in 2010. However, the 'planned' curriculum is not necessarily the same as the 'lived' curriculum. Therefore this study aimed to explore first-year students' experiences of our revised curriculum in terms of key curriculum aims.
Methods: Students' perceptions of their experiences were collected using University managed surveys (semester 1/2, 2010-2016, ten Likert scale items and two open-ended questions) and the Student Engagement Questionnaire (semester 2, 2010-2013, 35 Likert scale items; Kember & Leung, 2009, Learning Environment Research, 12:15-29). The survey data were supplemented with focus group data from first-year clinical tutors. Broad agreement for Likert scale items were averaged for 2010-2013 and 2014-2016. Open-ended and focus group data were analysed thematically, using a framework of core curriculum aims.
Results: Students perceived the curriculum was coherent, used learning strategies that were active and involved cooperation, with positive student relationships and they developed related generic capabilities. Over the period from 2010-2016, students' perceptions improved related to feedback supporting their learning, and appropriate and aligned assessment. Students' open-ended comments were consistent with their Likert scale responses, such that they valued the integrated nature of their learning and considered it was professionally relevant. Clinical tutors' perceptions supported these data, indicating students integrated their learning from other classes with their clinical activities.
Conclusions: Students perceived their learning experiences aligned well with our planned curriculum aims and future practice. Ongoing monitoring of these core features of the learning design and environment is critical to enable maintenance of these outcomes.
Acknowledgements: First-year students (2010-2016), clinical tutors (2010) and first-year staff who planned and implemented the curriculum.
Methods: Students' perceptions of their experiences were collected using University managed surveys (semester 1/2, 2010-2016, ten Likert scale items and two open-ended questions) and the Student Engagement Questionnaire (semester 2, 2010-2013, 35 Likert scale items; Kember & Leung, 2009, Learning Environment Research, 12:15-29). The survey data were supplemented with focus group data from first-year clinical tutors. Broad agreement for Likert scale items were averaged for 2010-2013 and 2014-2016. Open-ended and focus group data were analysed thematically, using a framework of core curriculum aims.
Results: Students perceived the curriculum was coherent, used learning strategies that were active and involved cooperation, with positive student relationships and they developed related generic capabilities. Over the period from 2010-2016, students' perceptions improved related to feedback supporting their learning, and appropriate and aligned assessment. Students' open-ended comments were consistent with their Likert scale responses, such that they valued the integrated nature of their learning and considered it was professionally relevant. Clinical tutors' perceptions supported these data, indicating students integrated their learning from other classes with their clinical activities.
Conclusions: Students perceived their learning experiences aligned well with our planned curriculum aims and future practice. Ongoing monitoring of these core features of the learning design and environment is critical to enable maintenance of these outcomes.
Acknowledgements: First-year students (2010-2016), clinical tutors (2010) and first-year staff who planned and implemented the curriculum.