What is the evidence for biology as the 'heart of eligibility' to study medicine? A retrospective analysis.

The first, sometimes the only, selection tool for entry into undergraduate medicine is prior educational attainment (PEA). This is often further specified to include certain subjects, for example, biology is a prerequisite for entry into medicine in many Asian countries. However, there seems no clear evidence base for this prerequisite. Our aim, therefore, was to carry out a retrospective quantitative study comparing the performances of five cohorts of students (2015-2019 entry; n = 588) with and without biology PEA in Years 1 and 2 Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) integrated written assessments (n = 3) and anatomy practical examinations (APE) (n = 5). The study was conducted at one of Singapore's three medical schools. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests and Mann-Whitney U with p values of less than 0.05 were considered significant. There were no significant differences in performance on any Years 1 or 2 integrated written assessments. Similarly, in one of the APE, a significant difference was found for one cohort (academic year [AY] 2015-2016) out of five assessments. These results suggest that having a prior biology qualification does not make a difference in assessment performance in the early years of medical school. This information may help stakeholders and admissions committees decide whether biology is required for medical school entrance.

Interprofessional collaboration (or lack thereof) between faculty and learning technologists in the creation of digital learning.

BACKGROUND: As digital learning becomes more prevalent and important in health professions education, learning technologists play increasingly central roles in designing and delivering learning materials. However, little is understood about the process by which learning technologists have integrated into the existing teaching and learning ecosystem, and it seems that they remain marginal and undervalued. Our aim in this paper was therefore to examine the process of interprofessional co-development of course materials as experienced by educators and learning technologists. METHODS: Our approach was qualitative, using individual semi-structured interviews (conducted between July 2021 to May 2022) to explore the working relationship between faculty and learning technologists. Transcripts were analysed abductively. RESULTS: We found that the attitudes of both faculty and learning technologists towards collaborating to drive digital adoption in health professions education fell into two main themes: "embrace" and "replace" - and "conflict", which we present as a third theme. Our results revealed that faculty did not take an active and agentic role in developing their digital practices in respect of education delivery. Learning technologists positioned themselves as a resource to support faculty's knowledge and skill gap in digital competence. There was an obvious power differential between the two groups: learning technologists lacked agency and seemed in the position of servants to faculty masters. This created barriers to effective collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: By examining the process of co-development of course materials by faculty and learning technologists, we open up a space to examine the social, relational and organisational complexities associated with interprofessional collaboration in digital health professions education. Our study also has important implications for guiding educational policy to better position learning technologists to effectively collaborate with faculty and realise the potential of digital health professions education.

The qualitative orientation in medical education research.

Qualitative research is very important in educational research as it addresses the "how" and "why" research questions and enables deeper understanding of experiences, phenomena and context. Qualitative research allows you to ask questions that cannot be easily put into numbers to understand human experience. Getting at the everyday realities of some social phenomenon and studying important questions as they are really practiced helps extend knowledge and understanding. To do so, you need to understand the philosophical stance of qualitative research and work from this to develop the research question, study design, data collection methods and data analysis. In this article, I provide an overview of the assumptions underlying qualitative research and the role of the researcher in the qualitative process. I then go on to discuss the type of research objectives which are common in qualitative research, then introduce the main qualitative designs, data collection tools, and finally the basics of qualitative analysis. I introduce the criteria by which you can judge the quality of qualitative research. Many classic references are cited in this article, and I urge you to seek out some of these further reading to inform your qualitative research program.