Article
Development of a postgraduate study course in immune modulation: Results of the piloting
Search Medline for
Authors
-
Sandy Kujumdshiev
- Leipzig University, Clinical Immunology, Medical Faculty, Leipzig, Deutschland; DHGS German University of Health and Sport, Deutschland
-
Ulrich Sack
- Leipzig University, Clinical Immunology, Medical Faculty, Leipzig, Deutschland
-
Mms Farag
- Faculty of Science (for Boys) Al-Azhar University, Immunology Lab, Botany and Microbiology Department, Ägypten
-
Claude Lambert
- St. Etienne University Hospital, Clinical Immunology, St. Etienne, Frankreich
-
Rachid Soulimani
- University Lorraine, Neurotoxicology, Development and Bioactivity, Frankreich
-
Eleni Efthimiadou
- National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Department of Chemistry, Athen, Griechenland
-
Working Group
- IMCert staff educators from Al-Azhar, Cairo, Ain-Shams, Damanhour and Aswan University, Cairo, Ägypten
-
Mahmoud Seddik
- Al-Azhar University, Vice president of Al-Azhar University for Postgraduate and Research, Kairo, Ägypten
-
Reham Hammad
- Al-Azhar University, Clinical Pathology Department, Faculty of Medicine (for Girls), Kairo, Ägypten
| Published: | September 11, 2023 |
|---|
Outline
Text
Background: IMCert (Immune Modulation Certificate for postgraduate students acquired by blended learning) is an approved proposal in the “Capacity building in the field of higher education” Erasmus plus program. The aim of IMCert was to develop a postgraduate study course in cooperation between Egypt, France, Germany and Greece. Before implementation of all nine modules of the certificate we piloted three of them.
Methods: 44 participants from five Egyptian universities (Al-Azhar, Cairo, Ain-Shams, Damanhour and Aswan University) attended the three modules at Al-Azhar University. The participants had backgrounds in Medicine (9), Pharmacy (11) or Natural Sciences (24) and 18 were male. They have been selected by questionnaire and expert interviews from 1835 applicants. Teaching included theoretical parts online and in physical presence, practical lab parts, PBL cases, videos, worksheets and group discussions. Assessment consisted of written assessment, research proposal writing and presentations.
To assess the process of the piloting we used questionnaires for participants and teachers, conducted written assessments and asked the participants how competent they felt before and after each module (1 not competent at all to 10 very competent).
Results: In written assessments participants answered correctly to 50 to 80 per cent depending on modules.
Participants rated their competency in basic immunology with 6.97 (SD 2.4; mean±SD) before and 8.67 (SD 1.99) after the module. Molecular biology was rated 7 (SD 2.29) before and 8.57 (SD 1,95) afterwards.
Four of the five in teams produced research proposals were very mature reaching the level of professional time plan and budging distribution. In public health participants rated their competency in writing a research proposal 7.8 (SD 2.31) before and 8.11 (SD 2.19) after the module.
Discussion: Before implementing newly developed curricula it is very important to pilot them and receive ideally 360-degree feedback. The feedback of the participants was very good, they praised specifically the expertise of the teachers. Practical parts need more subgrouping and more teachers to optimize the hands on learners’ success. Piloting can improve your curriculum further and make it more successful for everyone.
Take home message: Optimal teaching methods and assessments together with constructive alignment resulted in increasing competencies with our participants.
