Abstract

Background: The integrated‑based education must pay attention to the beneficiaries, in whom our learning outcomes would,be achieved. For establishing any curriculum for integrated‑based medical schools, one must be aware with the psychological,aspect of concerns, of these, learning style of the students must be considered on selection of the teaching strategy and tools,to be compatible with the students’ understanding. Objectives: The main objectives of the present study were to construct an,episodic evaluation of our radiopathology curriculum. To attain that, we found the primary step is to be acquainted with how,the students perceive both radiology and pathology lectures. Thus, the recognition of the students learning style was the initial,and primary pace in the extended chain of challenges and changes that have been done in the radiopathology curriculum. The,students learning style acts as a core for the adjustment of both radiology and pathology teaching. In harmony with the results,obtained, adjustment of some teaching strategies and tools have been done in a sequential manner by the adjustment of the,lecture to be matched the students’ learning style.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in the two following,years on two consecutive undergraduates by Faculty of Medicine, Albaha University (FMBU), where two classes have been,selected for this study. Each class includes 60 students. The learning style was evaluated through responding to the well,-structured questionnaire designed by Medical education unit of FMBU. This instrument breaks up the students into figures,attached, audiovisual, and observable or perceptible learner. Consistent with the results obtained, adjustment of the pathology,and radiology lectures have been done. For this purpose, eight modules were selected for the study and control group, i.e. four,for each. The changes in the lecture were made in the modules of the study group only.
Results: The majority of the students,subjected to this study have figure attached learning style, so adjustment of the lecture was done to become more interactive,and to match the students’ learning style. The study revealed significant differences between the degree of pathology in both,the study and control group with P = 0.019, also a significant difference was obtained between the degrees of radiology in,both groups with P = 0.004. No significant differences were found between the degree of pathology and radiology either in the,study or in control group. Conclusion: Recognition of learning style is particularly imperative for curricular development and,its periodic evaluation. Not all ways of the interactive lecture are suitable for the students, but those elaborated from student,learning style is the most active that make our lecture more attractive and more impressive, and hence, improvement of the,student performance have happened which reflects on achieving intended learning outcomes.