Paper MCAC 06/2015

THE INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL UNIVERSITY (IMU)

STUDENT FEEDBACK ON COURSE EVALUATION
Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS)
Cohort: ME 1/13
Time of Evaluation: October 2014
First Tabled at CAC meeting on: 9th January 2015
No

Indicator

Students
satisfaction
with course
evaluation

Quality Objective

To ensure that no
aspect of the average
course evaluation
should receive a score
of less than 4.0
(or less than 2.5 for the
new template for the
cohorts in blue font)

Modules

Musculoskeletal
System

Semeste
r

Semester
4
ME 1/13

Aspects
C

PBL

2.92
(2.93)

2.99
(2.93)

Values indicated in closed brackets and highlighted in red reflect the score for the ME2/12 cohort.
C = Course (overall)
PBL = Problem Based Learning
MM = Medical Museum Session
HV = Community/ Hospital/ Nursing Visits

R = Reference Material
SM = SILs and MOFA
CS = Clinical Skills
EL = E-learning

*Scores in the brackets and in red colour are for the ME1/12 cohort.

SM
-

Achie
No
Achi

MM

CS

HV

EL

Plenary

3.29
(3.26)

3.24
(3.15)

3.18
(3.19)

2.79
(2.70)

2.85
(2.97)

Achie

Reason for Shortfall / Increase

The MMS sessions scored above the norm and

achieved a score of 3.29 which is a slight increase
compared to the scores of the ME1/12 cohort.
The following were comments on these sessions:
-Need more facilitated/ Guided museum sessions.
-Nicer models with clear structures labelled in
MMS.
-Need for more models in the museum relevant to
MSK system.

Action Plan for Remedial

Measures / Preventive
Measures

Time Frame

We appreciate the fact that most

students like the MMS sessions
March 2015
well. To facilitate student
to April 2015
centered learning and to avoid
tutoring or didactic sessions, 3
MMS sessions are guided and
facilitated. We will strive better
to improve the content of guided
sessions and to engage the
students.

The score for plenaries is above the expected norm The sequence of the anatomy
with a score of 2.85 but less than the ME1/12
lectures has been looked into
March 2015
cohort where it scored 2.97.
after discussion with the
to April 2015
anatomists and this has been
The reasons for this could be the following:
implemented in the timetable of
the ME2/13 cohort starting in
-Overload in content of some lectures
March 2015. This has been done
-Uploading of lecture notes a week earlier
after MCAC approval(Paper
MCAC 25/2014)
-Lecture notes to include references for content

Person-In-Charge

Review
Mechanism

Paper MCAC 06/2015

SPV/ANU

Follow up
from next
and
subsequent
student
evaluation
reports.

SPV

Follow up
from next
and
subsequent
student
evaluation
reports.

-Use of anatomy models during lectures

-Divide overloaded plenaries into two
The score for the clinical skills was above the
expected norm (3.24) which is slightly better than
the previous cohort (ME112- 3.15).
It also scored the highest when compared to all
other components of the evaluation.
Comments from students included the following:

I will inform the coordinator in

charge to consider the students
March 2015
suggestions about the CSSC
to April 2015
sessions.
Dr. Wahyu
Hidayat
Mohammed(WHM)

Follow up
from next
and
subsequent
student
evaluation
reports.