Factors Affecting Achieving Learning Outcomes in Basic Years in Medical School at King Abdul Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted as part of a curricular reform process in Faculty of Medicine (FOM), King Abdul Aziz University Jeddah Saudi Arabia. It explored the perspective of FOM stakeholders on the challenges and factors in the teaching and learning domains that are affecting achieving learning outcomes. METHODS: Faculty teaching in the second and third year, students in third and fourth year, and administrative personnel were included. An electronic survey was created. Chi-Squared test for independence was used to test the association between the correspondent group and different statements. Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA was used to examine the differences in medians among the questions utilizing ranks to evaluate different questions, followed by post hoc pairwise comparison with Bonferroni-corrected alpha. RESULTS: A strong association was seen between the correspondent level and perspective on time allocated for modules and vertical integration of the curriculum. Among the most highly ranked challenges for using various teaching strategies were the loaded curricula content and the limitation of time, with an overall median rank of 8. Student readiness and motivation were also significant factors, however, students considered motivation less of a challenge. CONCLUSION: Continuous assessment of factors affecting teaching and learning will bridge gaps in curriculum.

Relationship between admission criteria and academic performance in basic science courses in health science colleges in KAU.

BACKGROUND: At King Abdulaziz University, medical and health science schools depend on admission exams (aptitude and achievement) and preparatory year scores in their students' selection. However, with the growing number of applicants and the drastic changes in teaching and assessment in these colleges, continuous assessment and development of admission criteria are needed. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the correlation of admission exam scores, in addition to the preparatory year Grade Point Average (GPA), with academic performance in the basic science subjects such as Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology in health science colleges. METHODS: The study was conducted on four cohort studies, two faculty of nursing cohorts; nursing students (2017-2018, n=146) nursing students (2018-2019, n=81), and two faculty of applied medical sciences cohorts, clinical nutrition students (2017-2018, n=33), and clinical nutrition students (2018-2019, n=28). The students' scores of General Aptitude Test (GAT), Scholastic Achievement Admission Test (SAAT), and preparatory year GPA were all recorded at the beginning of each semester before the beginning of courses. Clinical Biochemistry and Clinical Pharmacology exam results were recorded at the end of the semester. Correlation was done for each cohort and all cohorts pooled. RESULTS: Results showed only a weak correlation detected between SAAT and the overall achievement in Clinical Biochemistry (r= 0.192, P= 0.042) in nursing students (2017-2018), but no correlation was seen with SAAT or preparatory year scores. There was also no significant correlation between admission exams scores and the students' academic achievement in Clinical Biochemistry or Clinical Pharmacology. On the other hand Clinical Pharmacology exam results showed a significant positive correlation with Clinical Biochemistry results (r=0.688, P=0.000). CONCLUSION: Our results could indicate the need to revisit the admission criteria for these colleges. Furthermore, specific preparatory year tracks for health science colleges can ensure that students improve the specific skills and knowledge required for their future college years3.

Determining defensible cut-off scores for dental courses.

PURPOSE: Many countries and institutions have a fixed passing score of 60%. For example, this is a national policy in all Saudi universities where students at all levels must score 60% or higher to pass courses. The purpose of this study is to broaden the scope of standard-setting applications, using data from five major dental courses (Endodontics, Operative, Removable and Fixed Prosthodontics, and Pedodontics) in the 5th dental academic year for two consecutive years to determine the cut-off scores. METHODOLOGY: Four expert raters conducted Angoff's method on final examinations of five dental courses to determine the cut-off scores for the two academic years (2015, and 2016). Cohort size of 2015 was 120 students, whilst that of 2016 was 142 students. The study was conducted at the faculty of Dentistry, at King Abdulaziz University (KAU) from December 2017 to June 2018. RESULTS: All five dental courses yielded different cut-off scores than the fixed 60%. The cut-off scores for 2015 and 2016 examinations were 59.15%, 63.75% for Removable Prosthodontics, 51.86%, 53.75% for Fixed Prosthodontics, 47.42%, 50.5% for Pedodontics, 74.22%, 74.31% for Endodontics and 58%, 55.55% for Operative Dentistry. CONCLUSION: Angoff method yielded different cut-off scores than the fixed 60% passing score currently used by the dental school, yielding a difference in pass-fail rates by as much as a staggering 41%. This finding provides support to use evidence-based standard-setting methods to determine the cut-off score for the courses in Dentistry programme.