STRENGTHS | WEAKNESSES | SUGGESTIONS |
---|---|---|
• The transversal module allowed having intervention proposals at the end of the course | • The transversal module presented many kinds of problems | • The intervention proposal transversal module must be kept but it should be modified to become better adjusted to the course needs and better connected with the other modules |
• The teachers worked on topics of their expertise, which helped to achieve adequate and interesting materials | • Low availability of the professor responsible on the transversal module | • Improve the definition of activities, stating more clearly the objectives and how to develop them |
• It achieved the goal of stimulating students by the balance between teaching model and the materials used | • The transversal module did not really integrate with the rest of the course | • Amplify the use of problem-based education techniques |
• The strategy of cross-checking materials among the professors was really helpful | • Lack of feedback between professors and tutors | • The use of more adequate tools, focusing on a broader perspective |
• The interaction between the coordination and tutors was considered optimal | • No standardized evaluation methods and issues with the criteria applied | • Improve the interaction between professors and tutors |
• The academic activities were generally good and deepened the proposed topics | • Low feedback between tutors and students | • Improve the timing of activities and organize a feasible schedule for both tutors and students |
• General and academic coordination support | • Low interconnection across the modules | • The course content must be prepared with reasonable antecedence to facilitate the revision |
• Information sharing among teachers and tutors | • Lack of time from some tutors to dedicate to the course, lack of expertise in the specific field of PHC | • Avoid the last trimester of the year to apply the course (to avoid holidays and vacations) |
• The interaction and shared experience among the mentors | • Activities timing and feedback | • Improve the course layout and organization |
• General course guidelines and modules helped the course methodology | • Lack of interaction among the students | • Improve the tracking of activity completion |
• The training materials were very up to date and interesting | • Timing of material preparation; the uploaded materials were not uploaded at the appropriate time | • Improve tutor training on the course-specific material and content as well as the web platform |
• The module ‘Pharmaceutical Service and its components’ was the most exciting by its use of multiple teaching strategies | • The synchronous session held in the Blackboard live session tool was a difficult to manage because of the participants' different time zones | • Periodic meeting involving coordination and tutors to follow up the modules |
• The interaction among the whole team was excellent | • Lack of homogeneity among module structures | • Improve the evaluation tools |
• Incentivize more participative behavior among the students | ||
• Improve follow-up of the students’ performance during the course | ||
• Reduce the volume of reading for the module and focus on content integration | ||
• Increase professors' participation on their specific module |