Matching student personality types and learning preferences to teaching methodologies.

The purpose of this study was to identify teaching styles that complement the learning preferences of undergraduate dental students while enhancing the quality of patient care. A formidable challenge to reform in dental education has been overcoming the resistance by faculty and administration to recommended changes. The organizational structure of dental institutions, with their independent departments, makes obtaining consensus on educational issues difficult. For beneficial change to occur, clear evidence of the benefits to all within the organization must be presented. The objectives of the study were to 1) identify the most common personality types among first- and second-year undergraduate dental students at the University of Texas Dental Branch at Houston using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI); 2) identify the learning preferences of these personality types; and 3) determine a more effective approach to teaching clinical dentistry based upon student personality types and learning preferences. Four common personality types were identified among respondents: ISTJ, ESFJ, ESTJ, and ISFJ, with a predisposition for Sensing (S) (desire for facts, use of senses) over Intuition (N) (look for possibilities, relationships) and Judging (J) (prefers decisiveness, closure) over Perceiving (P) (desire flexibility, spontaneity). The most common occurring personality type, ISTJ, represents an Introverted, Sensing, Thinking, Judging individual. Specific clinical curricular techniques that would appeal to these common personality types are identified, and an explanation of their benefit is provided. Results of this study demonstrate the importance of faculty understanding and acknowledging different student personality types and related learning preferences as a way to initiate improvement of undergraduate dental education, promote student motivation, and allow for an expression of learning style preference.

An evaluation of clinical mock boards and their influence on the success rate on qualifying boards.

An important responsibility of each dental school to its graduating dental students is exposure to and evaluation on a mock board that simulates one or more of the examinations given by its respective regional testing agencies. An introduction to the procedures and environment that will be encountered on a qualifying examination will hopefully increase a student's chance for success on such a test. The purpose of this study was to test the relationship of the various attributes or variables of mock boards given by dental schools in the United States and Puerto Rico with results obtained on the regional or state qualifying board(s) related to timing, structure, method of evaluation, graduation, and remediation. A twenty-item questionnaire was mailed to key clinical or curricular deans at fifty-four accredited dental schools. Ninety-three percent of schools completed and returned the questionnaire. In the sample of respondents, the percentages of schools participating in the various qualifying exams were: CRDTS = 22 percent; NERB = 42 percent; SRTA = 20 percent; WREB = 28 percent; Independents = 24 percent, with a reported overall passing rate (greater than or equal to 70) of 58 percent. The median time between the mock board and the qualifying board was 7.5 weeks. Results indicated that no single aspect of a mock board had a statistically significant effect on the outcome of qualifying examinations, resulting in a failure to reject the null hypothesis. Such findings may indicate that schools should focus their efforts on reassessing the restrictions and requirements imposed upon their students related to their mock board. A future study could include surveying recent graduates for their opinions of the value of their mock board experiences.