%0 Journal Article
%T Impact of medical students' descriptive evaluations on long-term course development
%A Mats Wahlqvist
%A Annika Skott
%A Cecilia Bj£¿rkelund
%A G£¿sta Dahlgren
%A Kirsti Lonka
%A Bengt Mattsson
%J BMC Medical Education
%D 2006
%I BioMed Central
%R 10.1186/1472-6920-6-24
%X Qualitative content analysis was used. The context was consultation skills courses in the middle of the G£¿teborg undergraduate curriculum during five years. An analysis of 158 students' descriptive evaluations was brought together with an analysis of key features of course development; learning objectives, course records, protocols from teachers' evaluations and field notes. Credibility of data was tested by two colleagues and by presenting themes at seminars and conferences. Authors' experiences of evaluating the course over many years were also used.A corresponding pattern was found in students' descriptive evaluations and key features of course development, indicating the impact of students' open-ended feed-back. Support to facilitators and a curriculum reform also contributed.Students' descriptive feedback was both initiating and validating longitudinal course implementation. During five years, students' descriptive evaluations and teachers' course records were crucial sources in a learner-centred knowledge-building process of course development.Students' descriptive evaluations and course records can be seen as important instruments in developing both courses and students' learning. Continuity and endurance in the evaluation process must be emphasized for achieving relevant and useful results.How can students' views be used for developing courses in the transition to clinical education? This question is discussed in recent reports of students' opinions and learning experiences in the transitional phase [1,2].Since the days of Flexner, a conventional 20th century version of the medical curriculum contain a preclinical phase of biomedical sciences followed by a later clinical phase [3]. To students, the transition from the first phase to the second forms a critical stage in which the term 'shock of practice' has been introduced to characterize students' learning problems [4]. Even though many curricula have undergone changes in order to integrate preclinical and
%U http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6920/6/24