Comparison of the Educational Environment at a Medical College under Two Different Curricula
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36570/jduhs.2020.3.992Keywords:
Educational environment, student perceptions, Undergraduate medical education, curriculum shift.Abstract
Objective: To compare the perception of students regarding the educational environment at a medical college which underwent a curricular change using the Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM) at two different points in time.
Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study was conducted at Wah Medical College, Punjab, Pakistan. The DREEM instrument was distributed in 2015 to students in all five years of the MBBS program and in 2019 to students in years 1-3 of the MBBS program.The DREEM questionnaire comprised of five categories which included learning, teaching, academic self-perception, atmosphere, and social self-perception.
Results: A total 692 students, participated in the study (400 (57.8%) students in 2015 and 292 (42.2%) in 2019). The total median DREEM score in 2015 was 122 (134-111) whereas in 2019, the overall median DREEM score slightly increased up to 126 (142-103) (p-value 0.850). The comparison of the two different curricula with categories of DREEM inventory score showed that a significant association of two curricula was observed with students perception about learning (p-value <0.001), positive perception about course organizer (p-value <0.001), atmosphere (p-value <0.001), and academic self-perception (p-value 0.031).
Conclusion: Curricular shift had not made a significant impact on the overall educational environment and the institute was able to maintain a healthy learning environment
Downloads
References
2. Rothman AI, Ayoade F. The development of a learning environment: A questionnaire for use in curriculum evaluation. J Med Educ 1970; 45:754–9.
3. Pace CR, Stern GG. An approach to the measure-ment of psychological characteri s tics of college environments. J Educ Psychol 1958; 49:269–77.
4. Whittle S, Whelan B, Murdoch-Eaton DG. DREEM and beyond; studies of the educational environment as a means for its enhancement. Educ Heal Chang Learn Pract 2007; 20.
5. Miles S, Swift L, Leinster SJ. The Dundee Ready Education Environment Measure (DREEM): a review of its adoption and use. Med Teach 2012; 34:e620-34. doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.668625.
6. Mushtaq R, Ansar A, Bibi A, Ramzan M, Munir A, Zaheer A, et al. Quality of educational environment at wah medical college: assessment by using dundee ready educational environment measure. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2019; 29:441–4.
7. Dunne F, McAleer S, Roff S. Assessment of the undergraduate medical education environment in a large UK medical school. Health Educ J 2006; 65:149–58. doi.org/10.1177/001789690606500205
8. Roff S, McAleer S. What is educational climate? Medical Teacher 2001; 23:333–4.
9. Salih K, Idris M, Elfaki O, Osman N, Nour S, Elsiddig H, et al. Measurement of the educational environment in MBBS teaching program, according to DREEM in College of Medicine, University of Bahri, Khartoum, Sudan. Adv Med Educ Pract 2018; 9:617–22. doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S160218.
10. Bakhshialiabad H, Bakhshi G, Hashemi Z, Bakhshi A, Abazari F. Improving students' learning environment by DREEM: an educational experiment in an Iranian medical sciences university (2011–2016). BMC Med Educ 2019; 19:397. doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1839-9.
11. Brown T, Williams B, Lynch M. The Australian DREEM: evaluating student perceptions of academic learning environments within eight health science courses. Int J Med Educ 2011; 2:2042–6372.
12. Sarwar S, Tarique S. Perception of educational environment: Does it impact academic performance of medical students? J Pak Med Assoc 2016; 66:1210-4.
13. Sattar A, Ayub M, Latif M. Perceptions of Final Year students about Educational Environment at Khawaja Muhammad Safdar Medical College Sialkot. Pak J Med Health Sci 2018; 12:272–6.
14. Edgren G, Haffling AC, Jakobsson UL, Mcaleer S, Danielsen N. Comparing the educational environment (as measured by DREEM) at two different stages of curriculum reform. Med Teach 2010; 32:e233–8. doi.org/10.3109/01421591003706282.
15. Zawawi AH, Elzubeir M. Using DREEM to compare graduating students perceptions of learning environments at medical schools adopting contrasting educational strategies. Med Teach 2012; 34:S25–31. doi.or/10.3109/0142159X.2012.656747.
16. Harden RM. The integration ladder: a tool for curriculum planning and evaluation. Med Educ 2000; 34:551–7. doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00697.x.
17. Dent JA, Harden RM. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers 2013; 166–173 p.
18. Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96. Med Teach 2015; 37:312-22. doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998.
19. Aba Alkhail B. Near-peer-assisted learning (NPAL) in undergraduate medical students and their perception of having medical interns as their near peer teacher. Med Teach 2015 ; 37 :S33-9. doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2015.1006602.
20. Apiraksakorn A, Howden S. The hidden curriculum in peer-assisted learning: An exploration of case discussions and journal clubs at a Thai medical school. Asia Pacific Sch 2019; 4:67–78. doi.org/10.29060/TAPS.2019-4-3/OA2093
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Ayesha Younas, Robina Mushtaq, Rafia Minhas, Moatter Jahan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the Journal of Dow University of Health Sciences are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc/4.0/. This license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium; provided the original work is properly cited and initial publication in this journal. 
