Last updated on December 2nd, 2021

Participation in Continuous Quality Improvement

Student feedback is critical to the continued growth of the University and its future students. Student feedback about the quality of instruction at SGU helps to improve the education of future medical professionals. It is the professional responsibility of all students to complete evaluations for each course and clerkship. Students who fail to participate in the evaluation process are considered non-compliant and unprofessional and may be subject to disciplinary action.

Any student with issues or concerns relating to their academic program in Terms 1-5 should bring them to the attention of a representative from the Student Government Association (SGA). The usual route for such issues is to then bring them to the attention of the relevant SOM committee (Student Academic Affairs Committee, Curriculum Committee, Non-academic Affairs Committee, etc.). The SGA may then bring the issue to the Dean of Basic Sciences Office. This route ensures that issues impacting the class are efficiently dealt with in a timely manner.

The Senior Associate Dean of Basic Sciences’ office meets regularly with students during the term at “Meet the Deans” sessions, and with the SGA representatives for each term.

End of Module Evaluation:

Please rate the quality of the following elements of the BPM 3 module 1 where appropriate:

Very Poor (1), Poor (2), Fair (3), Good (4), Very Good (5), Excellent (6)

End-of-Module Questions:

  1. Organization
  2. Formative Exercises (iMCQ, practice questions, quizzes, clicker questions)
  3. Summative Exercises (examinations, OSCEs, OSPEs, SOAP notes)
  4. Lectures
  5. DLA’s
  6. Small group activities
  7. Clinical skills activities (e.g. SIMLAB, hospital visits, standardized patient encounters)
  8. Overall module rating
  9. Please provide a specific example of a strong element of this module that should remain unchanged.
  10. Please provide a specific example of a weak element of this module and how it should be changed.
  11. Please provide any comments on the teaching/assessment venues and services supporting the curriculum delivery, e.g. venue readiness, exam proctoring service, internet etc.

End of Course Evaluation

Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements:

Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Somewhat Disagree (3), Somewhat Agree (4), Agree (5), Strongly Agree (6)

  1. The course structure and expectations were clearly communicated
  2. The MD Program Objectives were clearly communicated to students in this course.
  3. Learning/module objectives were clearly communicated to students in this course.
  4. The time and effort spent in preparation for this course and it assessments were proportionate to the credit allotment for this course.
    Overall this course contributed effectively to my medical knowledge.
  5. The major exams in this course were a fair assessment of the course learning objectives   

Learning Environment Evaluation

Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Somewhat Disagree (3), Somewhat Agree (4), Agree (5), Strongly Agree (6)

  1. SGU provides a safe and nurturing emotional climate that focuses on student success.
  2. I did not experience and/or witnessed mistreatment of students during this educational experience (e.g. harassment, discrimination, public humiliation, psychological/physical punishment)
  3. If any mistreatment witnessed please document in comment box
  4. I feel supported in my personal and professional pursuits by other School of Medicine students.
  5. There are faculty and/or other school representatives that I feel comfortable confiding in when important concerns arise.
  6. If you did witness mistreatment of students during this educational experience, please comment in textbox

If any mistreatment was witnessed, please document in comment box.

 

Strongly Disagree (1), Disagree (2), Somewhat Disagree (3), Somewhat Agree (4), Agree (5), Strongly Agree (6)