Undergraduate projects - do they have to be within the conventional medical environment?

Abstract

Undergraduate medical curricula now include increasing amounts of project work aimed at developing skills related to lifelong learning. One course allows students to choose from a wide range of projects, including 'conventional' hospital specialties and also from topics outside the mainstream of medicine. 'Conventional' and 'external' projects were compared in terms of the prior academic abilities of the students undertaking them, the assessment results and student and supervisor feedback, in order to consider whether the unconventional projects were equally valid within the undergraduate medical curriculum. School of Medicine, University of Leeds, UK. Medical students. No difference between the assessment results of the student groups was present, with over 85% of all students reaching a standard of 'excellent' or 'good' in their overall final grade. There was no difference in prior academic abilities between the student groups. Enjoyment of modules was comparable between student groups ('conventional' 89%, 'external' 93%) with good levels of satisfaction with the quality of supervision. There were no differences in students' self-appraisal of generic skill acquisition. Students who had undertaken 'external' projects felt they had gained less experience in data-handling and problem-solving skills. However, 'external' projects were rated higher by students in terms of having realistic and achievable objectives, and the supervisors of these projects were also more realistic about time commitments involved in project supervision. 'External' modules were very popular, with over 45% of students requesting places which were available for fewer than 20% of students per year. Concerns regarding the appropriateness of self-directed undergraduate medical student projects outside the mainstream of medical practice were unfounded.