Engaging in mixed methods research requires consideration of several major components: the mixed methods paradigm, types of problems, mixed method designs, collaboration, and developing or extending theory. Mixed methods is an ideal tool for addressing a full range of problems in medical education to include development of theory and improving practice.

Objective. To investigate students' metacognitive skills to distinguish what they know from what they do not know, to assess students' prediction of performance on a summative examination, and to compare student-identified incorrect questions with actual examination performance in order to improve exam quality. Methods. Students completed a test-taking questionnaire identifying items perceived to be incorrect and rating their test-taking ability. Results. Higher performing students evidenced better metacognitive skills by more accurately identifying incorrect items on the exam. Most students (86%) underpredicted their performance on the summative examination (actual573.6 6 7.1 versus predicted563.7 6 10.5, p,0.05). Student responses helped refine items and resulted in examination changes. Conclusion. Metacognition is important to the development of life-long learning in pharmacy students. Students able to monitor what they know and what they do not know can improve their performance.

Academic performance during the first two years of medical school is an important predictor of success on the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1. Research is lacking into what study methods successful students use, with success being defined as achieving a grade point average of above 90% in all or in most of the courses in the preclinical years.This study sought to identify specific study habits that successful students use and to demonstrate an association between preclinical grades and Step 1 scores. In this study, an anonymous survey was sent to first, second, and third year medical students that included various questions about their study habits, as well as their course grades (A, B, C, or fail) and, if applicable, their Step 1 score. Results demonstrated statistically significant differences existed between Step 1 scores and grades in the second year of medical school, with A students earning higher scores. A students tended to attend class, limit use of online lectures, study for 6-8 hours a day, and review lectures the same day they were given significantly more than B and C students did. This study demonstrates that certain study habits are employed consistently by successful students. These study habits should be shared with medical students early in the preclinical years to help students reach maximum potential both in class and on Step 1, which in turn will allow students to match into their choice of residency.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Medical school learning communities benefit students. The College of Medicine (COM) at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) provides medical students with academic, professional, and personal support through a learning community (LC) made of 7 academic houses. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of the academic house model at UAMS utilizing a mixed-methods survey. The aims were to: (1) assess student experience and satisfaction with academic houses, (2) describe the realms of advising and guidance, and (3) identify areas for improvement. Method: An online survey was assigned to 723 COM students (all students enrolled, first through fourth years) at UAMS in March 2019. The survey was comprised of 25 items (10 multiple-choice, 8 on the Likert scale, and 7 open-ended questions). Data was depicted using frequency and percentages and/or thematic review of free-form responses. Results: The survey response rate was 31% (227 students). The majority of students responding (132, 58.1%) attended 2 or more face-to-face meetings with the faculty advisor within the preceding year. However, 27 (11.9%) students did not have any meetings. Approximately two-thirds of the respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the guidance and direction provided by their advisors [very satisfied (n = 83; 36.6%); satisfied (n = 77; 33.9%)]. Themes that emerged from student generated areas for improvement include time constraints, advisor/advisee interest mismatch, and perceived inadequacy of advising content/connections. Conclusions: This study confirms the effectiveness of the LC model for advising and mentoring in the COM at UAMS. Uniquely, this study identifies not only learners’ satisfaction with their LC but also highlights areas for improvement which are widely generalizable and important to consider for institutions with or planning to start an LC.

No abstract