Annals of Tropical Medicine and Public Health
Home About us Ahead Of Print Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Editorial Board Login 
Users Online:698
  Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
LETTER TO THE EDITOR  
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 9  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 411
How different is the course evaluation results between biomedical students and nonbiomedical students


Surindra Rajabhat University, Surin Province, Thailand

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Web Publication14-Nov-2016
 

How to cite this article:
Kassada P, Wattanakornsiri A, Kaewla W, Wiwanitkit V. How different is the course evaluation results between biomedical students and nonbiomedical students. Ann Trop Med Public Health 2016;9:411

How to cite this URL:
Kassada P, Wattanakornsiri A, Kaewla W, Wiwanitkit V. How different is the course evaluation results between biomedical students and nonbiomedical students. Ann Trop Med Public Health [serial online] 2016 [cited 2017 Sep 19];9:411. Available from: http://www.atmph.org/text.asp?2016/9/6/411/193946
Dear Sir,

The important basic thing in quality management of the graduate degree curriculum is the assessment of the course.[1],[2] The idea from the client of the course or students is valuable. It is a general practice that the course evaluation has to be set and the analysis of the results has to be done. After getting the result, the feedback to the academic staff and administrator is needed.[1],[2] Generally, there are many ideas and criticisms received from any evaluation. The systematic reassessment of the course evaluation and the analysis of the results is very interesting and should be done. Here, the authors report the systematic reassessment of the course evaluation and the analysis of the results received from students of Surindra Rajabhat University, Surin province, Thailand. In the university, there are both biomedical and nonbiomedical postgraduate degrees. The biomedical degree is on Public Health. The routine course evaluation was done and the derived report on 2015 was analyzed. It can be seen that there is no difference between the evaluation results and scoring received from biomedical students and nonbiomedical student. Most of the students grade satisfaction to the course. Of interest, there are also additional specific comments on several aspects, which are not different between biomedical students and nonbiomedical students. Based on this study, it can be seen that there is no difference on perception of students toward the course. In fact, “teaching style had its fair share of challenges, which were largely dependent on the use and management of technology”[3] and should be evaluated. Surprisingly, although the nature of course management in biomedical students and nonbiomedical courses might be different, the derived report shows no difference of students' ideas. This might imply the standards of academics of the university. Focusing on the details of individual criticizm, most are personal problems and can be individually managed. Indeed, the comments received from any satisfaction evaluation are usually not reliable since one who comments usually has conflict in idea before commenting.[4] As Shetty et al. noted, “although the program was satisfactory to the majority of participants, some areas of concern were identified that need improvement.”[2] This is the basic concept for continuous quality improvement in academic course management.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Juresa V, Musil V, Sosić Z, Majer M, Pavleković G. Community health course--student's evaluation. Acta Med Croatica 2010;64:397-404.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Shetty VB, Shirahatti RV, Pawar P. Students' perceptions of their education on graduation from a dental school in India. J Dent Educ 2012;76:1520-6.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Moraros J, Islam A, Yu S, Banow R, Schindelka B. Flipping for success: Evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting. BMC Med Educ 2015;15:27.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Wiwanitkit V. Survey of satisfaction and complaint of customers of laboratory service, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital: 3-month experience according to ISO 9002: 1994 program. Songklanagarind Med J 2002;20:85-9.  Back to cited text no. 4
    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Wasana Kaewla
Surindra Rajabhat University, Surin Province
Thailand
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1755-6783.193946

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed716    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded9    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal