Table 3.
Themes and Representative Quotes of Critical Student Feedbacka
| Curriculum component | Themes | Representative quote |
|---|---|---|
| Overall curriculum | Prefer traditional lectures or direct instruction | “I much prefer lecture-style learning.… I find it very difficult to retain information from watching videos and attending interactive sessions. Whether I attend or not, I end up doing the same amount of relearning while preparing for the exam.” |
| Organization and/ or sequencing need improvement | “I found this course considerably fragmented.… The class could benefit from more structure and a greater focus on what is important.” | |
| Patient-centered springboard videos | Little value added to understanding and retention | “I unfortunately donť find the springboard videos to be very useful for my learning. I think they are interesting and well done; I'm just not sure how much they contribute to my overall understanding of the material.” |
| Content videos | Too lengthy or repetitive, with excessive content | “Overall I felt that the videos were too detailed in their content … not good for long-term retention.” |
| Inconsistency in style and/or depth | “The difference in style and depth between modules was sometimes confusing.” | |
| Interactive sessions | Low yield due to poor pacing and organization, unfocused discussion, or lack of coordination with videos | “These interactive sessions were not usually very helpful. A significant amount of time was used covering material that was not directly applicable, and the pace was often too slow.… We needed more guidance to direct our focus.” |
| Inconsistent facilitation quality | “The one problem with [interactive] sessions is [that] the variation in instructors could make the session amazing or merely okay.” | |
| Logistical problems (e.g., inappropriate physical setting, group size, noise level) | “This style of teaching will not work well in a large lecture hall. We need small classrooms if you want this to work.” |
a
On a microbiology course delivered to preclinical medical students (2015–2016). From a multi-institution collaboration to define core content and design flexible components for a foundational medical school curriculum.