A novel undergraduate biomedical laboratory course concept in synergy with ongoing faculty research.

Optimal integration of education and ongoing faculty research in many undergraduate science programs is limited to the capstone project. Here, we aimed to develop a novel course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) in synergy with ongoing faculty research. This 10-week course called Biomedical Research Lab is embedded in the curriculum of the undergraduate program Biomedical Sciences and grounded in the theoretical framework of research-based learning. Four groups of four students work together in a dedicated laboratory on an actual ongoing research problem of faculty. All groups work on the same research problem, albeit from different (methodological) perspectives, thereby stimulating interdependence between all participants. Students propose new research, execute the experiments, and collectively report in a single research article. According to students, the course enhanced scientific, laboratory, and academic skills. Students appreciated ownership and responsibilities of the research, laboratory teachers as role models, and they were inspired and motivated by doing authentic actual research. The course resulted in a better understanding of what doing research entails. Faculty valued the didactical experience, research output and scouting opportunities. Since topics can change per course edition, we have showcased a widely applicable pedagogy creating synergy between ongoing research and undergraduate education.

Self-evaluation of assessment programs: a cross-case analysis.

The goal of this article is to contribute to the validation of a self-evaluation method, which can be used by schools to evaluate the quality of their Competence Assessment Program (CAP). The outcomes of the self-evaluations of two schools are systematically compared: a novice school with little experience in competence-based education and assessment, and an innovative school with extensive experience. The self-evaluation was based on 12 quality criteria for CAPs, including both validity and reliability, and criteria stressing the importance of the formative function of assessment, such as meaningfulness and educational consequences. In each school, teachers, management and examination board participated. Results show that the two schools use different approaches to assure assessment quality. The innovative school seems to be more aware of its own strengths and weaknesses, to have a more positive attitude towards teachers, students, and educational innovations, and to explicitly involve stakeholders (i.e., teachers, students, and the work field) in their assessments. This school also had a more explicit vision of the goal of competence-based education and could design its assessments in accordance with these goals.

Feedback for general practitioners in training: quality, styles, and preferences.

A General Practitioner (GP) is no longer a loner, but a team player in either a group practice or a care centre. This change has led to a concomitant growth in curricular interest in skills essential for successful collaboration and for enhancing critical reflection towards colleagues' performance. Giving and receiving constructive feedback are examples of these skills. The aim of this study was to gain insight in the style and quality of feedback reports on consultation skills written by GPs-in-Training (GPiTs) and by their GP-trainers. Furthermore, the preferences of the GPiTs concerning feedback style were examined. Results show significant differences between GP-trainers and GPiTs in feedback style and quality. A ranking task indicated that GPiTs have a preference for reports characterised by a large number of reflective remarks. Questionnaire results indicate the added value of the use of peer feedback. Implications for the integration of peer feedback activities in the curriculum of GPiTs are discussed.

Learning styles: self-reports versus thinking-aloud measures.

BACKGROUND: Learning styles are often assessed through students' self-reports on instruments such as Vermunt's Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). Recent research, however, has questioned the adequacy of questionnaires for the assessment of learning styles. AIMS: The objective of this paper is to evaluate methods of learning style assessment as a means for identifying students at risk. Therefore, the ILS as a self-report instrument will be compared with the students' actual study processes, assessed through the thinking-aloud method. SAMPLE: In the first study 1,060 students from the Technical University of Delft participated. Thirty-three of them were selected on the ILS for participation in the second study. METHOD: The ILS was administered to the 1,060 participants and their study results (GPA and credit points) were collected. Next, the selected 33 participants studied a technical text while thinking aloud. Knowledge acquisition was measured by means of a post-test. Thinking-aloud protocols were analysed on frequencies of study activities, thus representing process measures of learning styles. RESULTS: The ILS proved to be a rather weak predictor of study results in Study 1. Results from Study 2 show hardly any correspondence between ILS and study process measures, although principal component structures of both measures were highly similar. Furthermore, study process measures outweighed the ILS in the prediction of study results (post-test, GPA and credit points). CONCLUSIONS: Learning style theory was confirmed by results on the study process measures. The assessment of learning styles through self-report instruments such as the ILS, however, should be reconsidered.