Evaluation of doctors’ performance as facilitators in basic medical science lecture classes in a new Malaysian medical school

Figures & data

Table 1 Demographic data of study populations

Items	Frequency, n (%)
Year 1
Male	60 (31)
Female	137 (69)
Year 2
Male	42 (29)
Female	102 (71)

Table 2 Average likert scale scores (mean ± SD; n=341) among male and female participants

Variables	Maximum scores	Male (n=102)		Female (n=239)		P value*
		Mean	SD	Mean	SD
ROLM	45	38.76	4.53	38.99	4.39	0.665
RLVG	20	17.16	2.44	16.88	2.53	0.348
RUVAR	15	13.24	1.52	13.39	1.50	0.389
RFOLC	35	29.42	3.77	28.94	3.65	0.272
RPFLH	5	3.89	1.13	3.90	0.89	0.949

Note:

* Independent t-test.

Abbreviations: ROLM, regarding the organization of lecture materials; RLVG, regarding lecture voice and gesture; RUVAR, regarding use of visual aids/resources; RFOLC, regarding fulfilling of the objectives of lecture class; RPFLH, regarding physical facilities of lecture hall; SD, standard deviation.

Table 3 Average Likert scale scores (mean ± SD; n=341) among year 1 and year 2 students

Variables	Maximum scores	Year 1 (n=197)		Year 2 (n=144)		P value*
		Mean	SD	Mean	SD
ROLM	45	39.36	4.05	38.33	4.85	0.041
RLVG	20	17.55	1.91	16.15	2.96	0.001
RUVAR	15	13.43	1.43	13.22	1.60	0.206
RFOLC	35	29.66	3.50	28.30	3.80	0.001
RPFLH	5	4.02	1.00	3.73	0.90	0.005

Note:

* Independent t-test.

Abbreviations: ROLM, regarding the organization of lecture materials; RLVG, regarding lecture voice and gesture; RUVAR, regarding use of visual aids/resources; RFOLC, regarding fulfilling of the objectives of lecture class; RPFLH, regarding physical facilities of lecture hall; SD, standard deviation.

Table 4 Average Likert scale scores (mean ± SD; n=341) among four different lecturers

Domain	Maximum scores	A (n=112)		B (n=87)		C (n=94)		D (n=48)		P value*
		Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
ROLM	45	39.54	3.56	41.70	3.64	35.59	4.11	38.98	4.10	0.440
RLVG	20	16.91	2.42	18.25	2.04	15.30	2.38	18.00	1.74	0.268
RUVAR	15	13.35	1.26	14.10	1.36	12.63	1.56	13.35	1.55	0.144
RFOLC	35	29.37	3.60	30.85	3.40	26.86	3.11	29.58	3.37	0.045 (A vs B)
RPFLH	5	4.35	0.84	3.76	0.98	3.67	0.87	3.54	1.09	0.073

Note:

* One-way ANOVA.

Abbreviations: ROLM, regarding the organization of lecture materials; RLVG, regarding lecture voice and gesture; RUVAR, regarding use of visual aids/resources; RFOLC, regarding fulfilling of the objectives of lecture class; RPFLH, regarding physical facilities of lecture hall; SD, standard deviation.

Table 5 Suggested methods for improving teaching of the present topic (n=24 of 341)

Item	Male (%)	Female (%)	All (%)
Video	2 (2)	4 (1.7)	6 (1.8)
Whiteboard	2 (2)	10 (4.2)	12 (3.5)
Take-home task	0	1 (0.4)	1 (0.3)
Language delivery	0	2 (0.8)	2 (0.6)
Diagram	5 (2)	1 (0.4)	3 (0.9)
No answers	96 (94)	221 (92.5)	317 (93.0)

Table 6 Students’ suggestions to improve lecture class quality (n=8 of 341)

Item	Male (%)	Female (%)	All (%)
Video	0	1 (0.4)	1 (0.3)
Whiteboard	0	1 (0.4)	1 (0.3)
Optimize the slide presentation	2 (2.0)	2 (0.8)	4 (1.2)
Interaction	2 (2.0)	0	2 (0.6)
No answers	98 (96.1)	235 (98.3)	333 (97.7)

Figure S1 Evaluation of lectures: student’s perspectives.