PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 8871459

Four years of problem-based learning: a student's perspective.

Abstract

After four years as a student in a medical school using problem-based learning I still find it an excellent way to learn. Group work has developed my personal skills and abilities. Learning how to obtain knowledge on my own has given me independence and confidence. Motivation to study has been encouraged by early clinical experience. Training in critical thinking has been further enhanced by in-depth studies. Medical education at the University of Linkoping has developed over the years and a contributing factor has been students' involvement in designing the medical training. There are benefits and disadvantages with problem-based learning, but on the whole it is an enjoyable and fruitful experience.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G von Doebeln. 1996. Four years of problem-based learning: a student's perspective.. https://doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.72.844.95

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Conditional reliability of admissions interview ratings: extreme ratings are the most informative.

CONTEXT: Admissions interviews are unreliable and have poor predictive validity, yet are the sole measures of non-cognitive skills used by most medical school admissions departments. The low reliability may be due in part to variation in conditional reliability across the rating scale. OBJECTIVES: To describe an empirically derived estimate of conditional reliability and use it to improve the predictive validity of interview ratings. METHODS: A set of medical school interview ratings was compared to a Monte Carlo simulated set to estimate conditional reliability controlling for range restriction, response scale bias and other artefacts. This estimate was used as a weighting function to improve the predictive validity of a second set of interview ratings for predicting non-cognitive measures (USMLE Step II residuals from Step I scores). RESULTS: Compared with the simulated set, both observed sets showed more reliability at low and high rating levels than at moderate levels. Raw interview scores did not predict USMLE Step II scores after controlling for Step I performance (additional r2 = 0.001, not significant). Weighting interview ratings by estimated conditional reliability improved predictive validity (additional r2 = 0.121, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Conditional reliability is important for understanding the psychometric properties of subjective rating scales. Weighting these measures during the admissions process would improve admissions decisions.

Education, Medical, Undergraduate↗