Roghayeh Gandomkar; Azim Mirzazadeh; Ladan Fata; Azim Mirzazadeh; Mohammad Jalili; Kamran Yazdani; Gholamreza Hassanzadeh; John Sandars
Volume 13, Issue 5 , January 2017, , Pages 440-450
Abstract
Background & Objective: Selfregulated learning (SRL) is highly task and context dependent Microanalytic assessment method measures students SRL processes while performing a particular learning task The present study aimed to design a microanalytic SRL assessment protocol for biomedical science learning ...
Read More
Background & Objective: Selfregulated learning (SRL) is highly task and context dependent Microanalytic assessment method measures students SRL processes while performing a particular learning task The present study aimed to design a microanalytic SRL assessment protocol for biomedical science learning Methods: This mixed method study was conducted in Tehran University of Medical Sciences Iran in 2013 The data collection tool was a microanalytic SRL assessment protocol that was designed based on the literature review expert opinion and cognitive interview with medical students and then piloted The participants consisted of 13 second year medical students The subjects were interviewed while conducting a biomedical science learning task Interviews were recorded transcribed and coded based on a predetermined coding framework Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data Results: The microanalytic SRL assessment protocol was developed in three parts; interview guide coding framework and biomedical science learning task An interview guide was designed consisting of 6 openended questions aimed at assessing 5 SRL subprocesses of goal setting strategic planning metacognitive monitoring causal attribution and adaptive inferences and a closeended question regarding selfefficacy Based on the pilot study most participants reported taskspecific and taskgeneral processes for the subprocesses of strategic planning (92%) metacognitive monitoring (77%) causal attribution (85%) and adaptive inferences (92%) Conclusion: The developed protocol could capture the finegrained nature of the selfregulatory subprocesses of medical students for biomedical science learning Therefore it has the potential application of modifying SRL processes in early years of medical school
Roghayeh Gandomkar; Azim Mirzazadeh; Leyla Sadighpour; Mohammad Jalili; Mojgan Safari; Batool Amini
Volume 12, Supplement , July 2015, , Pages 111-118
Abstract
Background and Objective: One of the potential strategies for ensuring the quality of educational programs is adopting a systematic approach to its evaluation. Current evidence indicates the lack of high quality program evaluation activities in the field of medical education. The aim of this study was ...
Read More
Background and Objective: One of the potential strategies for ensuring the quality of educational programs is adopting a systematic approach to its evaluation. Current evidence indicates the lack of high quality program evaluation activities in the field of medical education. The aim of this study was to review the current status of program evaluation activities in Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, and formulate guidelines to promote program evaluation activities at the University level.
Methods: A survey was conducted to investigate the current conditions of program evaluation using a questionnaire in 2012. Then, the comprehensive course evaluation guidelines, consisting of 22 items, were developed based on literature review, survey results, and experts’ opinions. Finally, each affiliated school developed its own evaluation plan. The evaluation taskforce reviewed evaluation plans using a checklist.
Results: Using one tool or resource, 9 schools (90%) conducted course evaluation at least once. The views of students, faculty, staff or alumni were used occasionally. Moreover, 4 schools (40%) reported the evaluation results. After reviewing 14 submitted course plans based on the checklist, 51 feedbacks were provided. Most and least feedbacks were related to evaluation design and implementation and evaluation infrastructure, respectively.
Conclusion: The process of developing guidelines and plans resulted in stakeholders reaching a common understanding of course evaluation, and in turn, creating evaluation capacity and more accountability.
