Table 1 Assessment of teaching efficiency
Item | Assessment methods |
|---|---|
Participation in discussion and interaction | The number of the students participating in discussion and interaction for each question was recorded and their participation degree was described as participation person-times. For example, for Question 1, 8 students participate in discussion, 3 answer questions and 4 challenge others’ answers, then the group’s participation in Question 1 was 15 person-times. The participation person-times for each question are summed up to get the overall person-times for the teaching course |
Initiative in referring to articles | After the course, a list of four referable articles closely associated with the case, including international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock composed by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee, were provided to the students in both groups. Two weeks after the course, the number of the students referring to the recommended articles and the number of the articles referred to by each student were investigated |
Initiative in participating in a group consultation | Within 2 weeks after the course, all the students were notified that a group consultation on a similar case with severe infection would be held in the infection wards, and they could participate in it on their own initiative. The proportion of the students participating in the consultation in each group was calculated |
Performance in a case analysis in the final examination | At the end of the semester, the participants were assigned a task in the final examination without prior notice to analyze a case with severe infection and infectious shock, to make a diagnosis and a clinical treatment scheme. The scoring rates of correct diagnoses and proper clinical treatments were calculated. For example, 10 key points were delineated for a full answer for the correct diagnosis, and the students listed 7 points, then the scoring rate of the student for the diagnosis was expressed as 0.7. Besides, the discrimination value in this case analysis was analyzed. All the indicators listed above were compared between the study group and control group for evaluating the teaching effectiveness |