Questionnaires in medical education.

Abstract

The taught may be taught by books, practicals, lectures and more recently by audiovisual presentations especially using microcomputers. The students vary in intellect and in degree of motivation, but have a common goal in qualification. Inevitably there is a degree of frisson between the two groups and anythmg which can be done to either group to help it to understand the other is useful. The word ‘understand’ is used, often glibly as understanding is an incredibly complex event. Students are very desirous of having their problems appreciated by the teaching staff and teaching staff are equally desirous of having feedback (reactions from the students) to enable them to respond. The Sir Lancelot Sprats of film drama are a caricature. A problem is a fact plus a value judgement on that fact and both aspects have to be considered. They are not mutually exclusive. Tuberculosis in Ethiopia is a tragic fact but not a problem, as the Ethiopian peasant accepts it as an act of whatever god he worships. He can do no other as he lacks knowledge and the ability to act in concert. Tuberculosis in Britain is a fact but also a problem because the value judgement is that it can and should be eradicated. The problem with the groups, teachers and taught, is how to communicate to mutual benefit effectively and with the minimum of annoyance to either party. Staff may seek student opinion expecting and accepting it if favourable and ignoring it if critical. Student bodies can whinge, a disease that tends to feed on itself. How do they communicate? One method is by discussion groups. Free discussion is difficult to organise and extremely time-consuming. The compromise is the questionnaire. Most people have a questionnaire within them and having used the method once may have a measure of reluctance for future use. Where the craving does not respond