4.2 Article

Positive changes in the medical educational environment following introduction of a new systems-based curriculum: DREEM or reality? Curricular change and the Environment

Journal

IRISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE
Volume 183, Issue 2, Pages 253-258

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s11845-013-1000-4

Keywords

Undergraduate medical curriculum; Educational environment; Curriculum reform; Students' perceptions; Learning environment; Curriculum evaluation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Evaluation of a new systems-based curriculum in an undergraduate Irish Medical School was carried out with the validated Dundee Ready Educational Environment (DREEM) inventory. Comparison was made with the results from a previous DREEM study in the old curriculum. Methods DREEM was administered to 225 medical students enrolled in the new curriculum. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS 17.0 and the Student unpaired t test. Results Increased mean scores supported greater satisfaction with the educational environment in the new curriculum. Students perceived better opportunities to develop interpersonal skills, ask questions and learn about empathy. Areas of concern included timetabling, support for stressed students and provision of feedback. Clinical students perceived their overall environment more positively. Preclinical students were more confident about passing exams and felt better prepared for clinical practice. Male students were more positive about the environment and found the teaching more stimulating. Female students perceived greater development of their problem-solving skills. Non-Irish students no longer perceived the atmosphere and their social self-perceptions more negative than Irish students, as was the case in the old curriculum. Conclusions DREEM is a valuable tool in evaluating the educational environment and monitoring the impact of curricular change.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available