Sifting Through Course Evaluations: Medical Student Comments Driving Surgery Curriculum Changes

ObjectiveStudent empowerment of curriculum changes is a double-edged sword. When examining our third-year surgery course every year, we debate where the line is between improving education through student input against allowing the students to design “an easy course.”MethodsWritten student comments on end-of-course evaluations (from the academic years 2006–2007 to 2010–2011) were analyzed using the qualitative approach described by Miles and Huberman. We compared the grouped comments to the course changes that were made over these years to determine what extent were we listening to students. Finally, we took the course changes made and juxtaposed them with student grades and with student course perceptions provided by the end-of-course evaluation analysis.ResultsWe identified 17 alterations to our curriculum since the year 2007-2008 and of those, 12 are directly related to student comments. Some examples of our changes were a grading-scale alteration, grouping of workshops, and adding a shelf examination review session. The overall course ratings by the students steadily rose over the 5-year period (2.57 to 3.39), while the percentages of A's earned by students decreased over that same time until the year 2010-2011when the percent of A's earned increased by over 30%.ConclusionsBecause of the fact that 12 of 17 course changes can be directly related back to the student comments, we feel confident that we are listening to students. The increase in perception of the course through the first 4 years did not coincide with higher grades. The changes made have been instrumental in the course winning the best clerkship award for the last 4 years.