Course analysis (course evaluation) Course code
1BI047 Course title
Pathology Credits
3 Semester
(spring/autumn) Spring
Period
2021-03-15 – 2021-03-25
Course coordinator
Sara Windahl Examiner
Sara Windahl Teacher in charge of component
Sara Windahl Other participating teachers
Malgorzata Parniewska – Responsible for the lab project
Number of registered students during the three- week check
52
Number approved on the last course date
36 (after 1st re-examination: 45)
Response frequency course valuation survey
59,6%
Other methods for student influence (in addition to concluding course valuation)
Two meetings were held in Zoom with the Course director, lab responsible person and the four course council representatives.
The first meeting was held on March 16 and the course director answered the student’s questions reading the site of examination, outline of the examination, how response would be given regarding the lab project and the learning outcomes.
The second meeting was held on April 12 where feedback was given from the students (summarised below).
Feedback reporting of the course evaluation results to the students Uploaded on the open course site in Canvas 2021-06-11.
Note that...
The analysis should (together with a summarising quantitative summary of the students’ course evaluation) be communicated to the education committee at the department responsible for the course and for programme courses also the programme coordinating committee.
The analysis was communicated to the education committee on the following date: 2021-06-11 The analysis was communicated to the programme coordinating committee on the following date:
2021-06-11.
1. Description of any conducted changes since the previous course occasion based on the views of former students
Due to Corona; all lectures, the Q&A session, and seminar were held online in Zoom. Only the oral and written examinations were held on Campus.
Lectures and seminars
• The lecture on biobanking and ethics was revised.
• A seminar conclusion session with the teachers was added to improve feedback regarding the seminar questions.
The lab project
• The lab compendium was revised to improve clarity.
• The lab introduction lecture was extended to give more information regarding Image J.
2. Brief summary of the students’ valuations of the course
We must keep in mind that only 60% of the class answered the KI survey.
Most of the responding students thought that there was a common theme running throughout the course, and that the course structure and methods used (e.g. lectures, seminars etc.) were relevant in relation to the learning outcomes.
Strengths:
The lectures were considered interesting, relevant, and well structured. It was appreciated that the lectures were recorded. The tissue demonstrations and microscopy session were highly appreciated.
The seminar and the teacher´s presence at the conclusion of the seminar was appreciated. The extended lecture for the lab project was appreciated. Some students appreciated that the examination was give on site.
Suggestions for improvements:
General
Many students felt that the workload was too heavy. It was also suggested by several students that the tissue biology and pathology course are combined in the future.
Lectures and seminars
For some lectures, the internet connection and/or sound were not optional and should be improved if the lectures are given online during future courses. Repetition from previous courses should be cut away.
The lab project
The lab project was considered too time consuming by some students. Several students were upset about the grading of the lab project as they did not find the information clear enough in the
compendium. More information on how to use Excel was requested. Some students did not
appreciate to have to work in groups of 3 students as they found it difficult to coordinate themselves.
The examination
Several students wanted the examinations online instead of on site and did not feel listened too when this suggestion was not approved. Some students did not want multiple answer questions.
More practice exams were requested. The students wanted to start the examination later.
Summary from “Course evaluation council”
Strengths:
General
The students found the course very short and in general more intense than other courses.
Lectures and seminars
Overall, the students found the lectures good and interesting. Many lecturers were good and could explain their topics well. The seminar was appreciated and found to be a good
preparation for the oral exam. The students appreciated to get feedback from the teachers.
Tissue demonstrations and microcopy sessions
The students found them overall great and with good explanations. The teacher had vast
knowledge of the topics. The compendium and slide database were good.
The lab project
The students found that it was a nice project in general and well thought out. Good to learn Image J. The Image J presentation was helpful and well organized.
The examination
The overall level of exam was considered good.
Suggestions for improvements:
Lectures and seminars
The student thought that the lecture “Inflammation - relation to diseases” would benefit as a PDF lecture. The information given regarding EMT-MET was new and could be expanded. If possible, the students would appreciate more information on the ethics of donations and global perspectives of ethics, and improved learning outcomes for the “Ethics and
Biobanking” lecture. The information given in the Mol Pathology PDF could benefit as a live lecture.
Tissue demonstrations and microcopy sessions
The lectures could have benefitted from better internet connection. Some students wanted more tissues to be added to the course content.
The lab project
The students suggested that more time should be allocated to the lab project and information regarding statistics calculations should be added to the compendium. The students want to work independently instead of in groups as it takes too long to collaborate.
They would have appreciated more detailed feedback for the oral examination.
The examination
The student asked that the format of the exam questions should be reconsidered. Addition of exam answer hints on a previous Inspera exam as a test exam would be helpful. The students also requested information on Inspera on how to log in, and that information given from KI about on campus exams and COVID to the students should be sent out and not only provided as a link to the information on the first page of the course Canvas site. They also wanted information on how many points each question generates already during the exam.
3. The course coordinator’s reflections on the implementation and results of the course Strengths of the course:
The content of the lectures was in general appreciated, as was the seminar. The students also appreciated that the teachers were present at the conclusion of the seminar. The microscopy sessions were in general very good and appreciated. The instructions (written, video and lecture) to Image J are now sufficient to understand and perform the image analysis of the lab project.
Suggestions for improvements:
Many students are upset about the bonus system for the lab project, we should consider removing the bonus. The students need more information regarding Excel. The biobanking and ethics lecture and its learning outcomes could be improved. A practice exam in the Inspera format with hints on how to answer the essay questions would be helpful.
4. Course coordinator’s conclusions and any suggestions for changes
Karolinska Institutet’s guidelines recommended on site examinations to facilitate legally secure and fair examinations for all students, and that the students should enter the examination hall at
different times to allow distance to be kept. These guidelines were kept. Still, the students were upset that the examination was given on campus in Flemingsberg. There is a large area outside the Neo examination halls that were used for the written examination. To minimize interaction between the students, the students were told to come at different time-points and were allowed to enter the examination halls one by one. This is the procedure generally used at LabMed which has worked very well for other courses. Unfortunately, despite these precautions taken by the course administration, the students gathered outside the examination hall. If restrictions are still in place during the next course, the course administration will ensure that guards are present in the hall to prevent student gathering outside the lecture hall.
The test exam was a paper-based exam from a previous examination, and the examination was in held using Inspera. This made the students nervous which is understandable. However, the results of the examination did not differ from previous years. Next time the course is given, another test exam, in the Inspera format, will be provided.
There seem to have been a miscommunication between the students and the course director
regarding old examinations. Students could retrieve old examinations from the course administrator.
However, the answers to those examinations are not available as several teachers are involved in the course and no document is made including all the answers to the exam questions. Instead, the students were offered to send questions to the course director if such arose in response to the correction of any exam questions. This opportunity was taken by a few students.
Students found the course intense. As in many other courses this is common, but the teachers and the Course director find the content of the course reasonable for a course in Higher education.
The students suggested that the information given in the Mol Pathology PDF should be given as a lecture and that the lecture “Inflammation - relation to diseases” would benefit as a PDF. This contrasts with the views provided by previous year´s students.
That one student felt discriminated due to ethnicity is not acceptable. Unfortunately, no more information is given to the course director and it is therefore difficult to address this incident. All teachers involved in the course are aware that no form of discrimination is acceptable.
Many students have no experience in using Excel before starting this course. As this is a very common tool in Medical sciences it is notable that they have not been introduced to this program before in their education. Perhaps it would be possible to add basic knowledge in Excel earlier in their education?
Before the next course occasion:
We will consider improving the experience of the lab project by removing the bonus system as it opposes the pedagogical aims of the lab project by redirecting the student’s focus away from the aim of the lab project. We will also consider adding information on how to use Excel if that is not
provided earlier in their education. One more practice exam in the Inspera format, including
suggestions on how to answer them, could be provided on the course site in Canvas. The Biobanking and ethics lecture and its learning outcome should be revisited and improved further.
Appendices: KI Survey: “KI enkät Pathology 1BI047 VT21”.
