Volume 9, Issue 3 (autumn 2022)
DSME 2022, 9(3): 10-18 |
Back to browse issues page
Research code: 4000178
Ethics code: IR.RUMS.REC.1400.240
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sadeghi M, shakiba E. Evaluation of the quality of clinical education from the viewpoint of Rafsanjan dental school students. DSME 2022; 9 (3) :10-18
URL: http://dsme.hums.ac.ir/article-1-379-en.html
URL: http://dsme.hums.ac.ir/article-1-379-en.html
PhD Student, Dentistry. School of Dentistry, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran
Abstract: (792 Views)
Background: In order to improve and enhance the quality of clinical education, a continuous assessment of its current status is necessary to identify its strengths and weaknesses. This study aimed to determine the quality of clinical education from the perspective of dental students at Rafsanjan School of Dentistry.
Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 108 fourth, fifth, and sixth year dental students at Rafsanjan School of Dentistry in 2021 using a census method. Eighty-nine students gave back the questionnaires. Data were collected through a questionnaire consisting of demographic questions and 26 questions on the five dimensions of educational quality using the Likert scale. The minimum score was 26 and the maximum was 130. Data were analyzed using SPSS software and descriptive statistics, as well as parametric analysis (ANOVA, t-test, and Pearson) based on the normal distribution of the data with a significance level of 0.05 (α=0.05).
Results: The mean age of the students was 23.83±2.2, with 49 females and 40 males. The mean scores indicated that the most and least important factors affecting the quality of clinical education were related to student interaction and evaluation, respectively. The surgery department had the highest quality and the restorative department had the lowest quality compared to other clinical departments. According to the Pearson test, there was no significant relationship between the year of admission and the clinical quality of any of the departments(pvalue>0.05)
Conclusion: The important strategies to increase the quantitative and qualitative level of performance in various clinical departments of dentistry are for the school officials to be aware of the level of clinical education quality. Therefore, it is recommended to continuously assess the current situation, analyze the problems, and identify the challenges to improve the quality of clinical education.
Methods: This cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study was conducted on 108 fourth, fifth, and sixth year dental students at Rafsanjan School of Dentistry in 2021 using a census method. Eighty-nine students gave back the questionnaires. Data were collected through a questionnaire consisting of demographic questions and 26 questions on the five dimensions of educational quality using the Likert scale. The minimum score was 26 and the maximum was 130. Data were analyzed using SPSS software and descriptive statistics, as well as parametric analysis (ANOVA, t-test, and Pearson) based on the normal distribution of the data with a significance level of 0.05 (α=0.05).
Results: The mean age of the students was 23.83±2.2, with 49 females and 40 males. The mean scores indicated that the most and least important factors affecting the quality of clinical education were related to student interaction and evaluation, respectively. The surgery department had the highest quality and the restorative department had the lowest quality compared to other clinical departments. According to the Pearson test, there was no significant relationship between the year of admission and the clinical quality of any of the departments(pvalue>0.05)
Conclusion: The important strategies to increase the quantitative and qualitative level of performance in various clinical departments of dentistry are for the school officials to be aware of the level of clinical education quality. Therefore, it is recommended to continuously assess the current situation, analyze the problems, and identify the challenges to improve the quality of clinical education.
Type of Study: Orginal |
Subject:
General
Received: 2022/11/13 | Accepted: 2023/05/28 | Published: 2022/10/2
Received: 2022/11/13 | Accepted: 2023/05/28 | Published: 2022/10/2
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-By-NC), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Contact Information
© 2015 All Rights Reserved | Development Strategies in Medical Education
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb
Development Strategies in Medical Education by http://dsme.hums.ac.ir/ is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.