BACKGROUND: The medical faculty of Heidelberg University implemented a new problem-based clinical curriculum (Heidelberg Curriculum Medicinale, or Heicumed) in 2001. The present study analyses the evaluation data of two student cohorts prior to the introduction of Heicumed. Its aim was to specify problems of the traditional training and to draw conclusions for implementation of a new curriculum. METHODS: The evaluation instrument was the Heidelberg Inventory for the Evaluation of Teaching (HILVE-I). The data were analysed calculating differences in the means between defined groups, with the 13 primary scales of the HILVE I-instrument as dependent variables. RESULTS: Teaching method and subject had no systematic influence on evaluation results. Thus, didactic lecture in orthopedic surgery achieved better results than small group tutorials, while the data on vascular and general surgery showed opposite results. Major factors for success were continuity and didactic training of lecturers and tutors. This is convincingly reflected by the results of the lecture course "Differential diagnosis in general surgery". The good evaluation data on small group tutorials resulted largely from the "participation" and "discussion" scales, which represent interactivity in learning. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest the importance of two major pedagogic ideas: continuity and didactic training of lecturers and tutors. These principles were widely implemented in Heicumed and have contributed to the success of the new curriculum.
BACKGROUND: The medical faculty of Heidelberg University implemented a new problem-based clinical curriculum (Heidelberg Curriculum Medicinale, or Heicumed) in 2001. The present study analyses the evaluation data of two student cohorts prior to the introduction of Heicumed. Its aim was to specify problems of the traditional training and to draw conclusions for implementation of a new curriculum. METHODS: The evaluation instrument was the Heidelberg Inventory for the Evaluation of Teaching (HILVE-I). The data were analysed calculating differences in the means between defined groups, with the 13 primary scales of the HILVE I-instrument as dependent variables. RESULTS: Teaching method and subject had no systematic influence on evaluation results. Thus, didactic lecture in orthopedic surgery achieved better results than small group tutorials, while the data on vascular and general surgery showed opposite results. Major factors for success were continuity and didactic training of lecturers and tutors. This is convincingly reflected by the results of the lecture course "Differential diagnosis in general surgery". The good evaluation data on small group tutorials resulted largely from the "participation" and "discussion" scales, which represent interactivity in learning. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study suggest the importance of two major pedagogic ideas: continuity and didactic training of lecturers and tutors. These principles were widely implemented in Heicumed and have contributed to the success of the new curriculum.
Authors: Florian Bauer; Steffen Koerdt; Niklas Rommel; Klaus-Dietrich Wolff; Marco R Kesting; Jochen Weitz Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2015-09-03 Impact factor: 2.151