Medical student responses to different formats for teaching delivery in a Dublin medical school

The Irish Working Group on Undergraduate Medical Education and Training and the General Medical Council (UK) published key recommendations in relation to standards of delivery for teaching medical students These included different teaching and learning opportunities providing a balance between large and small teaching groups; the provision of practical classes and opportunities for self directed learning; the incorporation of new teaching technologies including simulation as a method of delivery. In University College Dublin medical school some of these recommendations are being implemented for the teaching of psychiatry. In the present report medical student responses, by self completed questionnaire, on the psychiatry component of a teaching module were evaluated for 2 successive student streams in 2011 (n=187) and 2012 (n=224). Evaluation included collating data about large group (didactic teaching; 8 lectures of 1 hour duration delivered to entire group) small group teaching (8- 16 in composition, dialectical, 3 x 2 hours duration) and web based e learning units. Overall questionnaire response was 38.5 % for both streams (31, 46%). Preference for small group interactive workshops compared to lectures 96.5% (95%; 98%). Perceived relevance of the course material 80% (69%; 91%), perceived helpfullness of E learning material 70.5 % (62%, 79%), perceived clarity of learning goals or outcome 73% (74% 72%), perceived encouragement of reflection 75% (68%, 82% ), tutors perceived as supportive 82% (79%, 85% ); student colleagues perceived as supportive 74% (64%, 84%), quality of course organisation 71% (71%, 71%). Perceived relevance of what was taught to described course outcomes 74.5 % (73%, 76%). The results indicate that students significantly preferred small group workshop delivered teaching to didactic lectures. A 2/3 majority found the course material relevant or valid. A majority described the e learning material as helpful in both streams. Their tutors were perceived as more supportive than student colleagues in stream 1, but both groups were considered supportive by 84% in stream 2. A limitation of the study is the low response rate at 38.5% compared to value of 75% + 2.8 reported for medical students for 40 studies in different countries. This low response rate may be attributable to the questionnaire being handed out immediately preceding a composite module assessment test. In future, we will time the collecting of similar data differently.