Table 3. Post-Module Evaluation Results (n=5).
| Indicators of Module Quality | Instructor Ratings | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Module 1 | Module 2 | Module 3 | Module 4 | Average | |
| Quality of Instructor | 4.00 (0.00) | 3.60 (0.55) | 4.40 (0.55) | 4.20 (0.45) | 4.05 (0.27) |
| Relevance of Material | 4.00 (0.00) | 3.80 (0.84) | 4.40 (0.89) | 4.00 (0.71) | 4.07 (0.23) |
| Pace of Module | 3.25 (0.50) | 3.40 (1.52) | 4.40 (0.55) | 3.00 (1.23) | 3.55 (0.62) |
| Effectiveness of Module Presentation | 3.50 (0.58) | 3.80 (0.45) | 4.60 (0.55) | 3.60 (0.55) | 3.90 (0.29) |
| Relevance of Topics to Role as an Instructor | 4.44 (0.52) | 4.15 (0.42) | 4.40 (0.23) | 4.30 (0.20) | 4.31 (0.22) |
| Total Evaluation | 4.06 (0.16) | 3.90 (0.38) | 4.43 (0.55) | 4.00 (0.20) | 4.10 (0.15) |
Values shown as means (standard deviations) 1 = very poor, 5 = excellent; 1 = not relevant at all; 5 = crucially relevant.