Presentation Description
Chantacha Sitticharoon1
Issarawan Keadkraichaiwat1, Punyapat Maprapho2, Nisa Jangboon3, Nadda Wannarat3 and Varanya Srisomsak1
1 Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
2 Siriraj Health science Education Excellence center, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
3 Education department, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
Issarawan Keadkraichaiwat1, Punyapat Maprapho2, Nisa Jangboon3, Nadda Wannarat3 and Varanya Srisomsak1
1 Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
2 Siriraj Health science Education Excellence center, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
3 Education department, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University
Background:
The admission to the Doctor of Medicine program includes four groups: the Academic-group (academic portfolio), the Quota-group (bachelor graduates/athletics and musical talents), the Test-group (central admission test), and the Rural-group (a mandatory track for students required to serve as rural doctors). This study aimed to determine academic performance (summative scores), study behaviours (performing Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs) assessment with unlimited attempt allowance), and student perspectives to enhance future medical student selection.
The admission to the Doctor of Medicine program includes four groups: the Academic-group (academic portfolio), the Quota-group (bachelor graduates/athletics and musical talents), the Test-group (central admission test), and the Rural-group (a mandatory track for students required to serve as rural doctors). This study aimed to determine academic performance (summative scores), study behaviours (performing Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs) assessment with unlimited attempt allowance), and student perspectives to enhance future medical student selection.
Summary of work:
Data were obtained from 316 students (academic year 2021): 7.2% Academic-group, 1.8% Quota-group, 79.4% Test-group, and 9.17% Rural-group.
Data were obtained from 316 students (academic year 2021): 7.2% Academic-group, 1.8% Quota-group, 79.4% Test-group, and 9.17% Rural-group.
Results:
Summative scores were significantly higher in the Academic-group compared to the Test-group and the Rural-group in all subjects; in the Test-group compared to the Rural-group in all subjects; and in the Quota-group compared to the Test-group or the Rural-group in some subjects (p<0.05 all). The Rural-group had lower CLO scores, fewer additional attempts after passing each CLO, but more attempts for the first passing of each CLO than other groups. They predominantly preferred a two-category pass/fail evaluation, unlike other groups favouring a three-category outstanding/pass/fail system.
Summative scores were significantly higher in the Academic-group compared to the Test-group and the Rural-group in all subjects; in the Test-group compared to the Rural-group in all subjects; and in the Quota-group compared to the Test-group or the Rural-group in some subjects (p<0.05 all). The Rural-group had lower CLO scores, fewer additional attempts after passing each CLO, but more attempts for the first passing of each CLO than other groups. They predominantly preferred a two-category pass/fail evaluation, unlike other groups favouring a three-category outstanding/pass/fail system.
Discussion:
The Academic-group, generally from competitive backgrounds, demonstrated superior academic performance and favoured the "Outstanding" grading. Conversely, the Rural-group, often from less competitive backgrounds, showed lower academic performance, required more attempts for first-passing CLOs, and preferred a simpler pass/fail evaluation.
The Academic-group, generally from competitive backgrounds, demonstrated superior academic performance and favoured the "Outstanding" grading. Conversely, the Rural-group, often from less competitive backgrounds, showed lower academic performance, required more attempts for first-passing CLOs, and preferred a simpler pass/fail evaluation.
Conclusions:
Admission criteria significantly influence academic performance and study behaviours in the Doctor of Medicine program. The Academic-group stands out with higher summative scores, while the Rural-group displays a unique pattern, excelling in initial attempts but facing challenges in CLO scores and additional attempts.
Admission criteria significantly influence academic performance and study behaviours in the Doctor of Medicine program. The Academic-group stands out with higher summative scores, while the Rural-group displays a unique pattern, excelling in initial attempts but facing challenges in CLO scores and additional attempts.
Take home messages:
Students from different admission systems exhibit varying academic performances and attitudes towards the non-grading system. These insights can aid in refining admissions for better selecting future medical students who align well with the program.
Students from different admission systems exhibit varying academic performances and attitudes towards the non-grading system. These insights can aid in refining admissions for better selecting future medical students who align well with the program.