Using Student’s Examination Results in Evaluation of Curriculum Amendments at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kordofan, Sudan
Background: Educational evaluation data collection and analysis is used for judging about capabilities and shortage of an educational program.
Methods: The results of milestone examinations of students before and after the amendment of the curriculum were compared to see if there is any statistically significant difference between the two groups using SSPS.
Results: There is improvement in the performance of students who have studied with the modified curriculum in final examinations results in physiology and biochemistry (p value ≤ 0.01, both of them). Also in clinical subjects as Medicine, Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Paediatrics, the performance of students in final examinations was better than their performance in these subjects before amendments, and this was obvious in their results in these examinations, (p value ≤ 0.01 in all these subjects).
Conclusion: In our opinion, modified curriculum is better than the old one (before amendments), though student’s examination results were the only available measure, but it may need more time and other assessment tools to be evaluated perfectly.
2. Gouda EM, Youssef WT, Hamam AM, Fawzy MS. Needs Assessment of the Undergraduate Medical Students to Incorporate Courses on Medical Education into the Undergraduate Curriculum at the Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University. Intel Prop Rights 2013 2: 109. doi:10.4172/2375-4516.1000109.
3. Arrington B. Quality management and improvement. In: Duncan WJ, Ginter PM, Swange LE. Handbook of Health cares, Oxford. UK,Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 1998.
4. MucGuire CH. An overview of applied research in medical education problems and priorities. 1st ed. McGrow Hill: Gower press.1990.
5. Koczwara B, Tattersall M, Michael B Barton MB, Coventry BJ, Dewar JM, Jeremy L Millar JL .. et al. Achieving equal standards in medical student education: is a national exit examination the answer? MJA 2005; 182 (5): 228-230.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Author(s) and co-author(s) jointly and severally represent and warrant that the Article is original with the author(s) and does not infringe any copyright or violate any other right of any third parties, and that the Article has not been published elsewhere. Author(s) agree to the terms that the IJRDO Journal will have the full right to remove the published article on any misconduct found in the published article.