Yu Sui Chen¹
Sushela Devi Somanath¹
1 International Medical University 

Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) has been shown to promote student-centered learning in academic achievement [1]. It was introduced in our medical program in 2020. The main objective was to provide additional academic support to year 1 students to pass the first progression examination. 

This study examined the impact of PAL on 2 cohorts of year 1 students in the old curriculum (OC) and 3 cohorts in the present curriculum (PC) which commenced in 2021. Peer tutors (PT) were senior students with good academic grades. The PT met the tutees for at least three 2- hour sessions per semester. The PAL started in semester 2 and ran for two semesters in OC and one semester in PC. The difference is due to the timing of the progression exams. The students used these sessions to prepare for the examinations. The examination results between peer-tutored students (PTS) and non- peer-tutored students (NPTS) were compared using two- tailed paired student-t test. 

The results showed a significantly higher percentage of the number of students obtaining As (39% vs 27% in ME120; 35% vs 27% in ME220) and lesser percentage of the number of students failing (7% vs 10% in ME120; 14% vs 17% in ME220) the continuous assessments and the progression exam in PTS compared to NPTS respectively in the OC. However, such difference wasn't consistently observed in PC. 

Overall, PTS performed better than NPTS in OC but this finding was not consistent in PC possibly due to a shorter PAL duration. This suggests that PAL is effective in improving students’ academic performance and passing the progression exam provided it is run at least for a year. 

PAL promotes student learning in a social context and with sufficient length of time, it helps to improve students’ academic performance. 

1. Gary Packham & Christopher Miller (2000) Peer-Assisted Student Support: a new approach to learning. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 24 (1), pp 55-65 

Sarah Meiklejohn¹
Amanda Anderson², Tina Brock², Arunaz Kumar², Bronwyn Maddock², Lorraine Walker², Caroline Wright² and Fiona Kent²
1 Monash University
2 Monash University

Background

Collaborative health care practice is a skill that must be deliberately scaffolded during health professional courses through repeated instruction, modelling, and practice (1). In 2017, Monash University established an interprofessional curriculum framework and embedded multiple IPE activities into all health professions programs (2). An evaluation of the impact of using an interprofessional framework to prepare graduates for collaborative working was then undertaken in 2021. This presentation focuses on one section of the results, which detailed all IPE assessment tasks utilised across the Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences and Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 

Summary of work
A multimethod design using the context, input, process, product (CIPP) evaluation model was selected taking a social constructivist theoretical stance. Data collection included curriculum audit, reflections from representatives of all health professions courses offered at the institution, and interviews with graduates (n=24) in their first year of practice and their clinical supervisors (n=18) across 11 health professions. Qualitative data was analysed using framework analysis. 

Results

The interprofessional curriculum framework assisted the systematic implementation of educational activities across the health professions courses in the Faculty. Unfortunately, multiple gaps in assessment were identified across all four domains of the framework. Examples of authentic and meaningful assessment were identified and still recalled by recent graduates from some health courses, particularly interprofessional reflective assessment tasks embedded into clinical placements. 

The development of collaborative practitioners requires ongoing commitment to curriculum design including authentic and meaningful assessment. 

These findings offer insights into the value of an interprofessional learning framework for supporting integration of curriculum activities and highlight the importance of ongoing commitment to assessment of collaborative practice. 

Take-home messages / implications for further research or practice
Framework assists development of interprofessional curriculum
Authentic interprofessional assessment tasks can be successfully embedded into mainstream clinical placements 

References (maximum three) 

NAMRATA CHHABRA¹
Elize Archer₂, Sahiba Kukreja³ and Sarah Chhabra⁴
1 American University of Antigua College of Medicine 2 Stellenbosch University
3 Sri Guru Ram Das Institute of Medical sciences
4 University of Virginia, Charlottesville

As medical education shifts towards more integrative, collaborative, and experiential methodologies, the focus on small-group and team-based learning has intensified. Traditional assessments in medical education have largely concentrated on knowledge and clinical skills. However, the assessment of behavioral skills, such as communication, teamwork, empathy, and leadership, especially in team settings, remains less emphasized, despite their critical importance in effective medical practice and interprofessional collaboration. 

This presentation aims to shed light on the current state of behavioral skills assessment in medical education. It discusses the challenges and gaps in existing assessment practices, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach. The focus is on how behavioral skills underpin effective clinical practice and the necessity of their robust assessment for the holistic development of medical professionals and improved patient outcomes. 

Our exploration into various assessment tools and methodologies has yielded significant insights. These tools, while varied in their approach and application, offer valuable means to evaluate crucial behavioral skills in medical students. The results indicate a growing recognition of the importance of these assessments, yet also reveal a need for greater standardization and consideration of potential biases. 

The discussion revolves around the practical application of these assessment tools, addressing the challenges in integrating them into medical curricula. It also considers the potential biases in assessment processes and the importance of standardizing criteria to ensure fairness and accuracy. The session provides an opportunity for participants to reflect on the implications of these assessments in their own institutional settings. 

The presentation concludes that while significant progress has been made in recognizing the importance of behavioral skills in medical education, there remains a substantial need for their more effective assessment. The integration of robust assessment strategies into medical curricula is not only essential for the comprehensive training of medical students but is also critical for ensuring high-quality patient care and outcomes. 

Participants will take away a deeper understanding of the critical role of behavioral skills in medical practice and the implications for patient care. They will gain familiarity with contemporary, evidence-based methods and tools for assessing these skills in team-based settings. The presentation highlights the need for ongoing research to refine assessment tools and methodologies and to understand the long-term impact of behavioral skills training in medical education and practice. It calls for a concerted effort among educators, policymakers, and practitioners to prioritize and innovate in this vital area of medical education. 

References (maximum three) 

Lurie, S.J., Mooney, C.J., & Lyness, J.M. (2009). Measurement of the General Competencies of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education: A Systematic Review. Academic Medicine, 84(3), 301–309. 

Patterson, F., Zibarras, L. D., & Ashworth, V. (2016). Situational judgement tests in medical education and training: Research, theory and practice: AMEE Guide No. 100. Medical Teacher, 38(1), 3-17. 

Ten Cate, O., & Chen, H. C. (2016). Competency-Based Medical Education and Entrustment: A Fusion of Epistemology and Pedagogy. Academic Medicine, 91(2), 213-217. 

Hayden Frizzell^1,2
1 University of Melbourne
2 Department of Rural Health

Abstract 

Most tutors have some experience moderating spontaneous debates on relevant topics during their tutorials, which are usually very enjoyable and engaging for students. However, debates are rarely used as a formal assessment format, despite literature clearly highlighting its effectiveness. Many are even more reluctant to try formalised debates over Zoom. 

In one of our new ‘Discovery’ subjects for the MD program, we have designed an original method of assessing students – Zoom Team Debates. After researching a chosen topic and preparing over a number of weeks in groups, students present their arguments and attempt to convince their online live tutorial audience in a 45-minute 3-on-3 showdown. 

This assessment format has numerous advantages for both teachers and students:
 · Allows a ‘Group Presentation’-style assessment task to happen in a dynamic, enjoyable and non-repetitive way
 · Allows controversial topics to be explored in a suitable and supportive format
 · Provides an additional way for online students to feel connected and engage with each other over a number of weeks outside of class time
 · Requires students to ‘think outside the box’ and defend multiple perspectives of the same issue, skills which will be critical when making decisions in the workplace
 · Requires students to present and respond to both pre-prepared and on-the-fly elements ·Requires both individual contributions and sustained teamwork
 · Ensures equal participation of all students, including audience members
 · Allows all marking to happen on-the-spot during the tutorial
 · Allows research, communication, teamwork and presentation skills to be assessed in the same task
 · Can be used as Assessment For Learning or Assessment Of Learning as needed 

In this presentation, I will show educators how to create and facilitate a successful and engaging ‘Zoom Team Debate’ assessment task within the context of their own units. 

References (maximum three) 

None for Abstract