Use of student feedback to drive quality improvement (QI) in a preclinical U.S. medical school course

Figures & data

Table 1. Percent of students who strongly agree or agree with each of the statements below.

Student survey questions	2015 (N = 127)	2016 (N = 134)
This course had clear learning objectives	46%	92%
This course met its stated objectives	36%	90%
The teaching methods were appropriate for the stated objectives	17%	76%
Adequate time was provided to meet the learning objectives	20%	58%
The course content was relevant and of sufficient detail	38%	84%
The learning materials in this course were appropriate	25%	75%
There was good integration of basic science and clinical	51%	81%
Overall, this course was well structured	22%	69%
The evaluation methods were clear	38%	87%
The evaluation methods were applied consistently and fairly	39%	80%
I received timely feedback on my performance in this course	43%	72%
The course director was responsive to students’ concerns and needs	51%	84%
The learning environment conveyed the values of collaboration, respect and integrity	60%	87%
Overall I am very satisfied with this course	23%	83%

P-values were < 0.001 by the Pearson Chi Square test for all items, comparing 2015 and 2016.