MBBS (A100)
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
Copyright University College London Medical School
University College London
1
Contents
Head of Degree Programme Report
MBBS Statistics Admissions and Final Qualifying Examination
4
7
Year 1
9
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Foundations of Health and Medical Practice
Infection and Defence
Circulation and Breathing
Fluids, Nutrition and Metabolism
10
11
13
15
17
18
Year 2
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Movement and Musculoskeletal Biology
Neuroscience and Behaviour
Endocrine Systems and Regulation
Reproduction, Development and Genetics
Cancer Biology
19
20
22
23
24
25
26
Year 3
27
iBSc Programme Leads Report
28
Year 4
30
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
IOM
Module A
Module B
Module C
31
31
33
34
35
37
Year 5
38
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Child and Family Health with Dermatology (Paediatrics, General Practice,
Dermatology)
Clinical Neurosciences (Neurology, Psychiatry)
Women’s Health and Infectious Diseases (Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Infectious
Diseases)
39
40
44
Year 6
49
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Electives
Final Year GP Assistantships
50
50
53
55
Vertical Modules
57
2
45
47
Programme Organiser Report - Academic Lead
Anatomy & Imaging
Clinical Skills and Practical Procedures
Pathological Sciences
Use of Evidence
Use of Medicines
Mental Health
Social Determinants of Health (Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health
Component)
Student Selected Components Year 1, 2 and 6
Portfolio
Patient Pathway Year 1&2 Integrated & Community Care
Patient Pathway Year 2 Cardiometabolic
Patient Pathway Year 4 Cancer Patient Project
Professional Practice and Synthesis
Ethics & Law
MBPhD
58
60
61
62
64
65
66
67
Student Presidents
81
RUMS Senior Student President (2012-13) Report
Junior Vice President for Education (2012-13), Years 1&2 Report
Senior Vice President for Education (2013-14), Years 3-6 Report
82
83
86
3
69
71
73
75
76
77
78
80
FACULTY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES: Head of Department/Chair of Departmental Teaching Committee
Head of Department/Chair of
Departmental Teaching
Committee
Number Enrolled in department
Prof. Jane Dacre, Director of Medical Education and Chair of the MBBS TC
2013
A. i) commentary on student recruitment and student performance overall; ii) difficulties experienced and
action(s) taken to resolve these. You are asked particularly to discuss issues of student progression.
Student recruitment and performance was as expected this year. This was a significant achievement, as we introduced an
entirely new curriculum in September 2012.
B. Commentary on report of Chair of Boards of Examiners and action taken or planned
There were no major issues in the reports from the Chair of the Boards of Examiners. Detailed comments from external
examiners have been recorded and are in the process of being addressed.
C. Commentary on resourcing issues and action taken or planned
Resources for the MBBS continue to be a concern. Our work on making the funding streams more transparent has been
valuable in allowing us to be clearer about funding streams. We have consolidated our estate, to have a smaller footprint
for teaching, which is causing some difficulties which we are addressing. The quality of the space is, however, an
improvement.
D. Examples of good practice or prizes or accolades awarded to students or staff.
No UCLMS Provost teaching award this year. Our staff often have teaching in their job description, and I understand this
excludes them which seems a little unfair!
I was on the inaugural HSJ list of 50 inspirational women in the NHS, for my mentorship and leadership.
A UCL medical student, Sarah Lawrence, won the University of London Gold Medal for the highest achieving candidate in
medical finals in completion with all 5 London Schools.
E. Major changes envisaged and main forward-looking recommendations for action
We are still completing our curriculum reforms. The new Year 5 is currently in transition, and the changes will be
completed this academic year. Our finals examination timing will also change to allow for an earlier retake for failing and
borderline students.
G. Confirmation that the Departmental Teaching Committee has received an annual summary of the operation of
peer observation in the department (i.e. a statement confirming that peer observation of all relevant staff has
taken place in the preceding 12 months according to UCL policy) - please confirm that the annual summary has
been forwarded by the Departmental Teaching Committee to the Faculty Teaching Committee.
Received.
H. Confirmation that all Programme Specifications have been reviewed
Confirmed
I. Confirmation that the requirements of UCL’s Personal Tutoring scheme have been fulfilled.
Confirmed, although we have two tutor periods to cover our six year course.
4
STUDENT EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRES DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY
(For submission to the first meetings of the Departmental Teaching Committee, Staff Student Consultative Committee and
the Faculty Teaching Committee)
Head of Department/Chair of
Dr Ann Griffin
Departmental Teaching
Committee
A. Confirmation that all course and programme questionnaires received by the department (or academic unit)
Confirmed
B. Any matters which indicate key strengths or areas of good practice arising from the analyses of the
questionnaires and action taken or planned to disseminate this within the department or academic unit
Overall the quality of teaching appears to be highly regarded by students who respond to the evaluation
questionnaires. A comparison of overall satisfaction rates for 2012-13 for all modules indicates that with the exception
students were very satisfied with the overall quality of the modules.
With the exception of Year 1 and 2, a majority of the students agreed that on the whole the feedback they received
was constructive. However, 59% students in Year 1 and 62% students in Year 2 stated that they did receive any
feedback.
Overall, students in Years 4, 5 and 6 agreed that patients appeared to be fully aware of what the teaching sessions
involved.
C. Any matters of concern arising from the analyses of the questionnaires and any action taken or planned
There are some issues with timetabling, in particular clashes. This mirrors concerns raised in the National Student
Survey and is being addressed.
Low RRs is already seen as a serious issue. The average RR for 2012-13 sessions for horizontal modules was 36%.
The RR varied from a minimum of 21% (Year 1-FNM) to a maximum of 76% (Year 2-FHMP). UCLMS has appointed a
projects officer to review QA procedures and increase the effective engagement with students
Although stats indicate overall most/all planned teaching sessions actually took place we know that this is not the
case. Freetext comments (info from School Offices) and MBBS No-show Text Service indicate that cancellations are
probably more widespread. We are working with student reps to increase the use of the no-show monitoring.
D. Practical matters arising from the analyses of the questionnaires (including response rates) and any action
taken or planned
This year we are having a major review of our QAU processes including the SEQs. Student fatigue is caused by a
range of factors but we believe we can address these by taking action to:
 Reduce the SEQ burden
 Shorten the questionnaires
 Raise awareness of the QAU
 Work to close the loop
We have a project officer dedicated to work on this and have already launched our “ you said we listened” Moodle
page.
We have introduced a Moodle site for students to evaluate lectures in years 1 and 2.
5
E. Any other matters of note arising from the analyses of the questionnaires
None
G. Confirmation, if possible, of the dates of the meetings of (i) Departmental Teaching Committee (or
equivalent) and (ii) Staff Student Consultative Committee and (iii) Faculty Teaching Committee for which this
summary was or will be submitted
Report will be submitted to the:
th
 MBBS TC, 30 October 2013
th
 Student Rep Induction (Years 1-6), 7 November 2013
th
 SSCC (Years 4-6), 6 November 2013
rd
 FMS T&R Committee, 3 December 2013
th
Date: 26 October 2013
6
Admissions Data for AMR for 2012 UCAS Cycle
Applications and offers





Total number of applications in 2012 was 2341.
Number of offers made in the 2012 cycle was 503 (463 for 2012 entry plus 40 for deferred entry in 2013), plus 18
students deferred from the 2011 cycle.
365 accepted our offer as their first choice. (Of these 339 accepted their 2012 offer and 26 accepted a deferred
place for 2013 and, again, there are also the 18 deferring from the previous cycle to be taken into account for
2012 entry).
The final year one intake was 322 for the academic year 2012/13 (comprising 21 Overseas fee-payers and 301
Home fee-payers).
The gender split for the intake that year was 50% female and 50% male.
Entry qualifications for 2012 entrants
GCE A-levels (including all A-levels and excluding all AS-levels) – 273 students
With three A-levels:
A*A*A*
23
A*A*A
17
A*AA
29
AAA
22
AAB
1
With four A-levels:
A*A*A*A*
21
A*A*A*A
24
A*A*A*B
3
A*A*AA
22
A*A*AB
2
A*A*AC
1
A*AAA
26
A*AAB
6
A*AAE
1
AAAA
21
AAAB
8
AAAC
3
AAAD
2
With more than four A-levels:
41
International Baccalaureate – 28 students
Range of points scores 38 – 45 points, with mean total 40 points.
Graduates – 15 students
BSc/BA 2.1
9
st
BSc/BA 1
5
Masters
1
Other qualifications – 6 students
European Baccalaureate
Cambridge Pre-U Cert/A-level mix
1
5
7
Year 6 Assessment Statistics 2012-13
Title & Code of Degree
Programme
Programme Organiser
Number Enrolled on programme
MBBS
Dr Aroon Lal
370
Average Mark Gained
75.1 (written papers)
77.0 (OSCE)
Programme Statistics
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
10.3
38
9.7
36
79.2
293
0.3
1
0
0
0.5
2
Percentage Distribution
Not Complete
Absent
Fail 0-20
Fail 21-34
Pass
Class 3
Class 2.2
8
Class 2.1
Class 1
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
MBBS Year 1 and 2
MBBS Year 1 & 2
Science and Medicine
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
Copyright University College London Medical School
University College London
9
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Year 1
330 students entered the examinations in May 2013 of whom 302 passed (68 with Merit), 28 failed. 1 withdrew.
25 students entered the resit examinations in July 2013, of whom 18 passed and 7 failed. 3 withdrew.
Title & Code of Module/ Course
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
MBBS
Year 1
Dr Paul Dilworth
331
Average Mark Gained
Course Statistics
Number of Students
Marks
%
Number
Merit
21
68
Pass first
attempt
92
302
Pass resit
72
18
Percentage Distribution
100
80
60
Percentage
Distribution
40
Fail
2
7
20
Absent or
Withdrawn
0.9
3
0
Merit Pass first Pass
attempt resit
10
Fail
Absent
or WD
MBBS Year 1 and 2
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
The course utilizes a wide range of learning methods increasingly designed to ensure students understand the future
context in which they will need the knowledge and skills they are acquiring. Hence we have introduced some integrated
(e.g. simulation) teaching to augment the lecture and workshops programmes.
A persistent concern is the lack of resource to provide sufficient small group tutorials. Student feedback was generally
good or excellent.
92% of candidates passed the summative assessments at the first sitting. 2% failed the resit examinations and will not
progress to year 2 (pending appeals).
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The use of the personal responder system remains challenging with some excellent examples of it enhancing learning but
with many teachers utilizing it less perhaps in part due to lack of support and training. The cruciform decant is expected to
produce substantial medium term benefits but will clearly reduce student experience during the forthcoming academic
year. There remain substantial pressures on teaching space and students report concerns over access to computer
clusters
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback has been very good with two principal issues of concern raised. Firstly the desire for increased small
group teaching in several modules is unresolved and will require many more staff members to engage in teaching as well
as other activities. Secondly students request more feedback. This is being addressed by the introduction of 2 new weeks
in year one specifically for consolidation and integration of learning and feedback. A new formative assessment will
commence in November 2013 to allow students to measure their progress at an early stage and take action to overcome
issues.
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
The external examiners indicated very good progress with the transition to an SBA format of summative assessment
though there are some areas for development this year. Please see the report of the chair of the board of examiners
2012-13.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The new curriculum was introduced in 2012 with some further integration between the earlier and later years of the
course. The details are documented on the medical school website
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
A formative clinical examination was introduced in Year 1 and Year 2 in February 2013. Minor changes to include these
assessments have been suggested to the MBBS programme specification for consideration and approval by MBBS
Teaching Committee and FMS Teaching Committee.
11
MBBS Year 1 and 2
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
12
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Foundation of Health and Medical Practice
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Dr Pamela Houston
Number Enrolled on Module
331
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
 No major revision of content and teaching style occurred in this session.
 Activities that I monitor for engagement include:
o Quiz on Cell differentiation CAL: 434 attempts; year average: 86%
o Quiz on Cell permeability practical: 423 attempts; year average: 88%
o Three maths quizzes: 500, 760 & 580 attempts; year averages: 80%, 60%, and 70% respectively.
o Anatomy quiz: 458 attempts; year average: 83%
o Précis on homeostasis: attempted by all but 26 students
o Pharmacology poster submission all groups submitted.
 The level of engagement was extremely high in the new tasks introduced this session the Précis and the Poster
group work exercise. Comments from staff that marked these activities were glowing, with some truly exceptional
work submitted. Feedback was rapidly given in the form of a model answer for the students to self-assess their
own work. The feedback on the poster was slow again and will be delivered in a different form next session to
speed up feedback. Action: The feedback will be given within the first Consolidation Integration and
Feedback (CIF) week of the next academic year.
 Formative Assessment: 1177 attempts; 79% year average. Feedback on the assessment was available
throughout the module, unlike in previous years, and was well-received by students although there was a request
for tougher questions.
 MMG feedback from staff and students was positive although was seen as a little disjointed as we try to introduce
the complexities of the range of vertical course elements to provide a solid groundwork for the course.
 It was noted that attendance was reduced compared to past year groups. This was fed back via the MMG and
SSCC to student reps.
 The module was felt to be rather sparse in weeks 4 and 5 and therefore will be reduced to 4 weeks for 2013.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned


Lack of cluster space and library printers continues to be an issue raised by students.
The new library space was well liked and used by MBBS students as a pilot area before the major refurbishment
in the summer 2013; therefore it is envisaged that the new library facilities will provide great a resource for the
2014 running of the module but that we will have serious resource limitation in 2013.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
.
 Questionnaire response rate was excellent at 77%. With the majority >90% finding the teaching of good quality,
engaging and that the lecturer was approachable.
 Students asked for more feedback on their in-course tests and this was provided last year. More has been
requested and I will introduce the use of Peerwise to allow students practice in writing and answering more single
best answer questions.
 There were requests for more personal responder use, which was rather limited as we were unsure we would
have the handsets installed for this module. This will be increased across many modules.
Typical free text comments:
“It provided a good overview of subjects that we had covered at A-Level, and then went into further detail, for example,
on transcription and translation. I thought that having a week that was focused on blood was beneficial, because it linked
in nicely to our 2nd module - infection and defence.”
“The series of lectures given by Dr X were really interesting, well organised and didnt repeat because they were given by
the same lecturer. This also allowed the topics to be more coherent. Similarly the lectures by Dr X were not repetitive and
were interesting. The histology was really good, with the format of lecture and then workshop. A lot of the one off lectures
were very good- Dr Y and Dr Z. The pharmacology poster was good for group work. The mentoring system is really
valuable and works really well.”
13
MBBS Year 1 and 2
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None identified.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
14
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Infection & Defence
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Prof. Peter Delves
Number Enrolled on Module
331
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Students produce non-assessed work for their portfolio. The pace, content and appropriateness of the teaching methods
are deemed entirely satisfactory by both students and staff as evidenced by student questionnaire feedback, StudentStaff Consultative Committee, individual student comments, individual staff comments, and the Module Management
Group. There are no problems to be resolved.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
One student suggested a Glossary for the microbiology and virology content (the students already have access to an
immunology glossary via the module Moodle site). We will provide a microbiology and virology glossary for 2013-2014.
Some students have requested more practicals. A practical session was introduced for the first time in 2012-2013 and
has proved very popular. This was run in duplicate, but for 2013-2014 will be run in triplicate to provide an enhanced
learning experience for the students. The introduction of additional practicals beyond this would prove challenging for a
number of reasons including timetabling and staff resource.
There was a student request for a overall summary lecture at the end of the 4 weeks (we already have a summary
session at the end of each week) to pull everything together. This will be introduced and will take place on the first day of
the intermodule week which follows on immediately after the final week of I&D. Although there were a number of other
suggestions for improvements, as usual there are some conflicting comments, e.g. ‘more CALS’ vs ‘less CALS’. Many
students felt the module is already optimal and should not be changed. Overall satisfaction levels for this module remain
high (>97% of respondents scoring 5 or 4).
A small number of students have requested more formative assessment questions. There are in fact already formative
assessments throughout the module, including the use of TurningPoint quizzes. The main request is for small group
teaching and more feedback. Small group teaching would prove difficult due to limited, expert staff resource. Students
already receive multiple types of feedback and this request can therefore (at least to some extent) be addressed by
educating students to the diversity of feedback and an enhanced appreciation of what constitutes feedback.
There was also a comment about the order of the lectures, but experience with other programmes suggests that the
current order is in fact optimal.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
No module-specific comments.
15
MBBS Year 1 and 2
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
NA
16
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Circulation and Breathing
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Prof. Michael P Gilbey
Number Enrolled on Module
331
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Student learning appears to have been led at an appropriate pace. In the main, the specified syllabus was delivered but a
lack of engagement and experience of some teaching staff remains an issue. Next session we should be able to deliver
more support to academic leads as we have been able recruit more teaching fellows. However, we still do not have
access to a large enough cohort of teachers who have a deep understanding of medical physiology.
Focus on delivery in a number of key areas is planned; i.e., the introduction of Moodle quizzes, support for the use of
TurningPoint and further development of physiology practicals. At least one session on cardiovascular and respiratory
system interactions is also planned towards the end of the module. Further demonstrations using SimMan© or similar
are also desirable.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
.rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The students commented, as always, on the lack of computer cluster space; many students still do not have access to
lightweight notebooks/laptops or tablets.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
29% of the cohort completed the feedback questionnaire. The low return was thought to be due to the close formative
exams and OSCE and also to the number of requests to complete other quizzes. 70% of the feedback was good or
excellent and everyone had enjoyed the module (reported by student reps at MMG).
The anatomy and dissection sessions were well taught and enjoyed and the demonstrators were highly appreciated.
The workshops and practicals were well received, especially being supported by answers on Moodle. All students had
enjoyed and valued the tutorials, providing feedback and the opportunity of group work, but more physiology tutorials
were also requested.
The integrated day was well received. The lecture SPL questions and answers were thought helpful. Answers to the
anatomy SPLs were requested but it was emphasised that these can be found in text books: the anatomy Moodle quizzes
provided immediate feedback. Detailed course notes, similar to those provided for the Infection & Defence module, were
requested. Prof Gilbey (module lead) advised that the intention is not to provide more comprehensive notes but to
encourage active learning: slides, plus aims and objectives, indicate core curriculum with further information available in
textbooks and other sources. Different styles of learning were acknowledged and it was suggested that an explanation be
given at the beginning of each module as to the style intended. This should be reinforced throughout the module and
could also be emphasised in the Year 1 Introduction and Orientation week.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
No issues specific to Circulation and Breathing Module identified.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
17
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Fluids, Nutrition and Metabolism
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Dr Anselm Zdebik
Number Enrolled on Module
331
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
No major issues were noted.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There were some initial problems with audio last year in the Cruciform LT1, these issues have now been resolved.
Some lecturers complained about the tutorial rooms; where possible, bigger rooms have now been assigned. As in
previous years we were stretched for tutors teaching physiology – the initial idea to involve clinicians has now been
abandoned and we have secured enough tutors for the upcoming year. The major problem is that fewer and fewer people
feel confident teaching systems physiology – covering all systems, even at first year level. With NPP being more and
more neuroscience-dominated, this will leave a gap for teaching CV, GI, autonomic control, for example.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback on the course was generally very positive. Over the years students consistently suggest that lectures
finish before Easter to allow for exam preparation, this will be rolled out for the first time next year, with the week after
Easter being dedicated to revision and feedback.
Students also would be grateful for biochemistry tutorials similar in style to the five tutorials we are running for physiology,
but we seem to be limited by staff availability at this stage.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Please see overall report.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
18
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Year 2 Course Statistics
313 students entered the examinations in May 2013, 290 of whom passed (64 with Merit and 31 with Distinction – these
31 attained both a Merit and a Distinction) and 23 failed. 4 withdrew.
23 students entered the resit examinations in July, of whom 17 passed and 6 failed. 3 withdrew.
After the May and resit examinations 307 will progress to year 4 or an integrated BSc in 2013/14.
Title & Code of Module/ Course
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
MBBS
Year 2
Prof Lionel Ginsberg
317
Average Mark Gained
Course Statistics
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass first attempt
Pass resit
Fail
Absent or withdrawn
Number of Students
%
Number
10
31
20
64
93
290
74
17
2
6
0.9
3
Percentage Distribution
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percentage Distribution
19
MBBS Year 1 and 2
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
UCL medical students in Year 2 continue to produce high quality work in courses that adopt a variety of learning and
teaching methods. The pace and content of the modules is generally appropriate, though varying in demand. Some
relatively minor structural changes to the course are planned for 2013-14: moving reproductive physiology lectures from
RDG to ESR module; increasing clinician involvement in the delivery of the ESR module. We are also working on moving
the Cancer Biology module from after the Easter break to before, though this will require a more radical timetable change
and will be deferred until 2014-15. These measures are all intended to improve the logic and continuity of curriculum
delivery, as well as improving attendance. Regarding progression, the course statistics are encouraging.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Module leads identified some occasions where facilities affected programme delivery, and have generally provided
solutions to these issues. The impact on the programme of the cruciform hub and library developments is yet to be
determined.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback has generally been positive for the individual modules. Some changes to the timetable have emerged
out of staff-student discussions, e.g. the creation of periods of consolidation-integration-feedback (CIF). In Year 2, the first
CIF week will take place in November and will include revision and feedback sessions in the anatomy laboratory. The
second CIF week in February will largely be occupied with formative assessments (SBA, data, anatomy spot, and OSCE).
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
While generally positive, the comments from external examiners include areas where we could improve. These include
better blueprinting of assessment questions to the course, higher quality SBA questions, and better preparedness of the
students for the summative assessments by improving the quality of the formatives. A detailed response to the comments
of the external examiners has been provided and all areas are being addressed: a new blueprint has been created,
question-reviewing workshops are planned, and the formatives are being radically re-worked.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The leadership team for the early years of the MB BS programme has been strengthened in 2012-13. I joined as Lead for
Year 2 in the middle of the academic year and have been greatly supported by Dr Kath Woolf as Deputy Lead. There are
equivalent roles in Year 1 (Dr Paul Dilworth and Professor Ted Debnam respectively), all working under the guidance of
the Y1-3 Lead (Professor Mike Gilbey). With this expanded team, and the help of Clinical Teaching Fellows, continued
progress in improving curriculum delivery and assessment is feasible. Future actions are likely to include increasing the
st
content of the 1 CIF week in Year 2, converting the Y2 OSCE from formative to summative (in 2014-15) and moving the
Cancer module to before Easter (also in 2014-15).
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
The various changes outlined in preceding paragraphs are unlikely to be sufficient to warrant a change in the programme
specification.
20
MBBS Year 1 and 2
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
21
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Movement and Musculoskeletal Biology
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Prof. PN Anderson
Number Enrolled on Module
317
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Once again, the students achieved a good standard and their comments on the module were overwhelmingly favourable.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The difficulty of getting the class into, or out of, LT1 when there is another class coming in the opposite direction still
causes a considerable waste of time. It is not obvious what action can be taken to correct this problem.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
There were few points consistently made by the students. One request made by several students was for more time to
be spent on lower limb anatomy. Unfortunately it is not obvious how to make such an alteration to the timetable and, in
any case, study of the upper limb is an excellent way to make study of the lower limb simpler.
Another request was for more muscle physiology. A physiologist was asked to examine the lectures on Moodle to identify
what could be covered in more detail. She reported that there was nothing obvious to add to what was already taught.
However, we are now including a lecture on how exercise, age and disease-change muscle function.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
22
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Neuroscience and Behaviour
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Prof. Christopher Yeo
Number Enrolled on Module
317
Average Mark Gained N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The quality of student work is judged as good by the teaching staff and by the external examiners for the Neurosciencerelated components of the examination.
Neuroscience is a wide discipline and, to provide the foundations necessary to understand the nervous system in health
and disease, the course is full. Even so, the students have once again worked well on the course and have enjoyed the
layered structure as we build upon anatomical foundations through a spiral learning approach.
No significant problems requiring remedial action emerged during the year.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Only one problem is noted. The Auditory functions laboratory classes were run in a Wet laboratory, where the over-bench
shelving made communication between the stations and across the laboratory difficult. The concurrent Vision laboratory
classes run in a Dry laboratory with no over-bench shelving. Since cross-bench communication is not critical here, we
plan to switch the locations for the next session.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
See (B) above. The Vision laboratory classes were greatly enjoyed and highly rated by the students but the stations are
rushed. We have discussed reducing the number of stations – but this will mean increasing the number of students per
working group. We will pilot a reduced station number class this year, by removing the parallax station, to evaluate a
slightly extended session time.
As has been the case for many years, concerns about the short but intensive section devoted to the Head and Neck at
the start of the module were balanced by opinions that this is an ideal way start to the module, so we will continue with the
same overall plan for the module this year.
The balance of student opinion was very positive once again, so no major changes are needed.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
The External examiners were overall very satisfied with the neuroscience components of the examination and of the
standards achieved, so no special changes are required.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
23
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Number Enrolled on Module
Endocrine Systems and Regulation
MBBS Year 2
Dr Pamela Houston
317
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems


The feedback was extremely positive, although the return rate was very low only 32% compared to 38% (2012)
and 46% (2011). The falling figures seem to mirror the falling attendance but the solution to this is not clear.
A typical example of comments:
“It was well thought out and the key principles were repeated meaning there was a body of core knowledge that
was cemented in everyone. Dr H is a brilliant lecturer, teaching with clarity and at an appropriate pace and her
slides and hand-outs were a bonus. The clinical relevance of Endocrine Systems was done well too, especially
with the SPLs and Problem worksheets and the end of module formative quiz was exceptionally helpful.”

No major problems encountered, consistently good feedback, as in previous years. Students performed very well
in examination of this topic in February formative, May examinations and, where required, re-sits.
 The in-course assessment was not compulsory as it was so close to the formative exams, yet there were 623
attempts and the average score was 75%. The main feedback was that it was too short and needed to be harder.
Thus the quiz will be increased in length and difficulty.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned


The personal responders didn’t work for one of the new interactive lectures this issue has been resolved.
Student comment: “Lack of availability of printers in the cruciform - for a long period there was one functioning
printer, which is just not sufficient for the number of people requiring printouts, leading to queues of up to 30 mins
especially in mornings. If the medical school wishes to go 'paperless' they should ensure that adequate provision
is made for those who wish to have hard copies of materials ie provide more printers and more efficient ones.”
Action: this will be addressed within the new library structure.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned




From questionnaires overall rating for the module is 90% (students rated 4 or 5 (excellent)).
Not enough copies of core books (Essential Endocrinology and Diabetes); even though an online version was
available, the students seemed to struggle to find this.
Slow computers and printers, and not enough of them.
Students prefer to do the CAL’s at home or after the lecture but that is too passive and the current format lends
itself to self-directed study that some students don’t like.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None identified.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
24
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Reproduction, Development, Genetics
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Dr Leslie Dale
Number Enrolled on Module
317
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Non reported.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There were no problems with learning resources this year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Unfortunately only 28% of students completed the end of course questionnaire. Students were generally quite
complementary about the module. There were some negative comments but they were usually matched by positive
comments. For example, some students thought there was too little scientific content while others though there was too
much! Students complained about IT facilities, namely not enough computers in Cruciform cluster room and not enough
printers.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
25
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Cancer Biology
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Dr Shane Minogue
Number Enrolled on Module
317
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
This year’s module had a number of new lecturers and these were very well received and the module was praised for
being interesting and clinically relevant. However, this year a relatively large number of students failed to attend all
lectures and CALs.
Next year SM will make sure students understand that they are expected to attend all teaching events and that online
course content is not designed to substitute lectures.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
No issues affected delivery of the module. Some points were raised in student feedback suggesting that we include MP3
podcasts on Moodle and an online quiz.
This may be possible but will require a substantial amount of work. I will look into this for 2013/14.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
As in previous years, students expressed concern that the module was scheduled when they were expected to revise for
summative exams.
Some mentioned that this prevented them immersing themselves more deeply in the subject. SM is investigating with
Prof Ginsberg the possibility of rescheduling the week in future years.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
None reported
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
26
MBBS Year 1 and 2
MBBS Year 3
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
27
Year 1 and 2
Faculty of Medical Sciences: MBBS Year 3 Programme Organiser Report
Title & Code of Degree
Programme
Programme Organiser
Number Enrolled on programme
Intercalated BSc overview
Prof Stephen Davies ( Academic Lead Year 3)
275
Average Mark Gained
Programme Statistics
Percentage Distribution
WD
Not Complete
Interrupt
Class 3
Class 2.2
200
150
100
50
0
Class 2.1
Number of Students
%age
Number
35
96
58.5
161
3
8
0.7
2
0.4
1
1.4
4
1
3
Class 1
Marks
Class 1
Class 2.1
Class 2.2
Class 3
Withdrawn
Interrupted
Not Complete
2.1
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
This year again saw a consistently high standard of student achievement across all the individual programmes. This is
undoubtedly realised by a combination of the consistently high standard of students, combined with the high standards of
supervision and teaching throughout the individual degree subjects. The marks achieved in each programme are again
remarkably consistent.
The pace, content and teaching methods were considered appropriate/ excellent for most programmes and the variety of
teaching methods employed were acknowledged as enhancing the learning experience.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Many of the more popular third year modules within the Faculty of Life Sciences have dramatically increased in both the
number and range of students registered to them over the last year. This has created difficulties in finding appropriate
lecture theatres, and placed a significant strain on teaching resources. These popular modules and degree programmes
will have to be closely monitored over the forthcoming year(s).
Similarly pressures on student project allocations are set to increase with further rises in number of students. This will
again have to be monitored.
28
MBBS Year 3
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
There still seems to be some unevenness in the work required for a defined proportion of the overall mark (eg 1 ½ unit
profect) It is anticipated that the introduction of a unified exam board this year will highlight some of these inconsistencies,
and some harmonization of the individual degree programmes may be achieved.
Large increases in student numbers (see B) have resulted in extra pressures on lecture theatre provision and the time
frames for return of student coursework. Both these issues are being addressed.
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
The external examiners are again extremely complementary about the standard of marks achieved by students on all the
IBSc programmes, and they particularly comment on the high standards of the projects. Some external examiner reports
do however comment on individual aspects of the project requirements, methods of assessment and role of the external
examiner. It would be useful to have these updated and documented, prior to the first meeting of the IBSc board of
examiners meeting, at the end of the academic year.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The on-going discussions relating to the changes in provision and structure of the History of Medicine (HOM) degree have
been curtailed due the changes in academic personnel within the HOM. The integrated degree in HOM has been
discontinued from 2013/2014; a broader range of options including HOM will be integrated into the programme offered by
STS.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
As described in E., the HOM IBSC will be discontinued this year, bur module options in HOM will be offered by STS
integrated into the Philosophy Medicine and Society IBSc.
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
29
MBBS Year 3
MBBS Year 4
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
30
MBBS Year 4
MBBS Year 4 Reports, 2012/13
Statistics
Title & Code of Module/ Course
MBBS
Year
Year 4
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
Prof. Jean McEwan
332
Marks
Distinction
Number of Students: 332
%
Number
0
n/a
Merit
19.5
65
Pass (inc Merit)
96.0
319
Fail
2.7
9
Absent
0.3
1
Not Complete
0.9
3
Average Mark Gained
145.7
Percentage Distribution
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
%
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
Feedback has generally been good though the complexity of some modules (particularly module C) has led to concerns
about a consistent and equitable experience for the students. In addition some short modules (Mental health within
module A) were less successful than hoped.
ACTIONS: We have discussed this with the module C lead and new systems to distribute students and improve
experience in renal medicine and across multiple specialties have been set up for 2013-14.
A new lead for Mental Health in Module A has been appointed and new approaches initiated.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The size of the full year is a continuing problem and some hospital sites have limited teaching space. We continue to
negotiate with our NHS providers.
The clinical skills centre will be relocated within the Whittington following closure of the Union Holborn Building. Improved
AV for teaching communications skills has been installed on all sites over the past year. Long term planning for
improvement of these resources is being considered. A pilot programme of Faculty development (Communications and
Learning styles) has proven popular and improved engagement with teachers on all three sites.
31
Year 4
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The students have had variable experiences with the electronic portfolio (e-portfolio) and would prefer more direct and
personal feedback.
Action: A training course on feedback for teachers is planned and students will receive more teaching on the nature and
forms that feedback can take.
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Non identified.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
Continued discussing and iterative improvement is planned.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
N/A
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
32
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
IOM
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Prof. Jean McEwan
Number Enrolled on Module
332
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
This was the first year of the Introduction and Orientation Module, in the first year of the new curriculum. We undertook an
After Action Review meeting shortly after the module finished and conferred with students and teachers on whether the
course objectives were met. There was consensus that the introduction was better than that previously delivered, that the
Peer Assisted Learning worked well and that the strategies of splitting the year for weeks 2 and 3, allowed all students to
have clinical experience on the wards, and that the model of learning from watch a video, then watching a near peer
(PAL) and practicing in a safe environment (actors) before observing and practicing on the wards, was appreciated by the
students. The students had poor recognition of the value of working in learning sets.
Action: We will in the future give more attention to teaching the students about how they can learn, and learn
together, and make all learning more contextualised through background reading and narratives.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The new IOM Moodle 2 course which guided learning and gave access to different sources of information and learning
material, and more information about teachers and learning objectives, was deemed much improved. There is scope for
extending the course through the capability in Moodle for group work, and assessments. Locally produced video material
of clinical skills would be good role modelling to the students
Action: Extend the scope of the use of Moodle, and record more videos locally.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
We have taken heed of students feedback and suggestions through QA questionnaires and directly from student
representatives and have responded to all.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
No comments received
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
33
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Module A
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Dr Paul Dilworth
Number Enrolled on Module
332
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The module, despite diversifying in its contents, has continued to focus on weekly consultant led bedside teaching,
seminars and tutorials, ad hoc teaching from junior and middle grade doctors and allocation to outpatient clinics. The
students also have more opportunity to go on day and night takes. There has been some conflict between GP and ward
based teaching with the importance of GP teaching being stressed to the students. Vascular Surgery and Liaison
Psychiatry have been successfully implemented into the module although Liaison Psychiatry has suffered from poor
attendance. From next year closer attendance monitoring will be encouraged during the Liaison Psychiatry week to
ensure a higher level of student participation.to ascertain, what is impacting on students’ ability to attend during core
teaching hours and usefulness of sessions. The Vascular Surgery week has been particularly well received by the
students.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Non reported
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback was very good and Module A got the best ‘overall rating’ feedback of all the modules: the students highlighted
the organisation and structure as key points, feedback was excellent for Acute Medicine at the Royal Free and UCH.
Feedback was less good for Acute Medicine at the Whittington due to the same ward being used for Module C ID
teaching, but this was resolved after Block 1. Feedback was poor for the new Liaison Psychiatry teaching as students
would have liked a more clinical focus; the feasibility of bringing patients into teaching sessions will be assessed.
The core teaching week received poor feedback due to the opinion that too much information was being condensed into
too short a period of time. However the pathology book was seen to be a valuable source of information that could be
referred to throughout the placement.
The Preparation for Practice week – a new element of the module – had some below average feedback at the beginning
of the year for some of the teaching, but changes were made, and subsequently the week received very good feedback.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
34
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Module B
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Dr Gavin Johnson
Number Enrolled on Module
332
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Module B is a 12 week attachment across UCLH, Royal Free, and Whittington in gastroenterology, surgery,
rheumatology, orthopaedics, anaesthetics, clinical skills, and primary care. This runs 3 times a year
The teaching is blended, and whilst consistent across the three sites it is not uniform, and consists of:
- bedside teaching in small groups (5-6/group)
- large group teaching on topics (20)
- small group problem based learning (anaesthetics) (6)
- clinical skills workshops
- small group GP teaching (6)
- outpatient teaching (1 on 1)
- theatre teaching (1 on 1)
- 1 week of lecture theory at the beginning of the module
- UCL provided Moodle resources
Feedback has been consistently good, but the following issues were identified:
1) anaesthetic teaching at Royal Free not being delivered in small groups (ongoing challenge for 2013-14, new
anesthetic lead Dr Rob Stevens at UCH is in ongoing meetings with Royal Free Colleagues)
2) timetable clashes, particularly at Bloomsbury in Movement (mostly resolved on 3 sites due to administrators
carefully considering which firm to place each student prior to Module commencing). Bloomsbury issues subject
to a separate MMG 27/8/13 to resolve for 2013-4
3) Booking quality seminar rooms for group teaching for Movement aspect of Module at Bloomsbury (still
unresolved, Prof McEwan working consistently to address this, including better access to Education Centre
4) Students missing firm activities and teaching to attend GP (inevitable consequence of new curriculum, improved
with determining which firm to place students depending on what day they go to GP
5) Poor attendance in final block Spring/summer 2013 on all three sites (for attendance register to be taken 2013-14
in final block for teaching events
6) Digestive Health at Royal Free – excellent bedside teaching but faculty and students asked for more theory to be
covered from curriculum. The is a new Education Lead at Royal Free and Dr Johnson will encourage more group
sessions (eg JCC) for 2013-4 to cover the broad GI topics
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
See 3 above
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback from final SSCC 6/6/13 was universally positive, and well attended by students. No major overhauls of Module
intended for 2013-14.
See 1 and 6 above
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
TBA
35
Year 4
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
36
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Module C
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Dr David Wheeler
Number Enrolled on Module
332
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
There were some issues in terms of the structure of the module, one of which was the number of activities which students
were required to attend, and which took precedence. The module structure will be streamlined for next year with the
former cross specialties lecture series being delivered in a different format locally on each of the 3 campuses. This will
also help to resolve the problem of students missing clinics and other teaching opportunities which take place on a
Wednesday or Thursday (the days previously allocated for the cross specialties lecture series).
The firm structure varied from Campus to Campus i.e. students rotated through specialties every 4 weeks at the Royal
Free whereas at Bloomsbury they were on the same firm for 8 weeks. This will be changed next year with all Campuses
adopting a 4x4x4 week format for placements in endocrinology/nephrology, infectious disease/haematology and
neurology.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Recordings of the cross specialties lectures were not of the best quality, and depending on the format of some of the
sessions it was not always appropriate to record the sessions. As the cross-specialties will be taught locally in 13/14 this
problem should be resolved.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Renal teaching
The general consensus was that there was insufficient renal teaching during the module. 13/14 will see the introduction of
a combined endocrinology/nephrology 4 week block on all 3 campuses. Nephrology teaching delivered largely on the
Royal Free Campus where the Nephrology services are based and at satellite facilities at St Pancras and Edgware
Hospitals.
Timetable clashes
See section A. Once the new module and firm structures are in place this should alleviate this issue.
Neuro placements
There were some timetable clashes reported as well as some inaccessibility of teaching staff. This was most likely due to
the Neurology team running the old and new curriculum concurrently. Again, this should be resolved in 13/14. Students
will also be split equally between the Royal Free Hospital and Queen’s Square for their placements, which should help to
increase teacher contact time.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
37
Year 4
MBBS Year 5
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
38
MBBS Year 5
Faculty of Medical Sciences: MBBS Year 5 Programme Organiser Proforma
Programme Statistics
Title & Code of Module/ Course
MBBS 1004
Year
Academic lead for Year
Number Enrolled on Course
Year 5
Dr Jonathan Cartledge
378
Average Mark
Gained
72.6 (written papers)
81.7 (OSCE)
Course Statistics
Percentage Distribution
Not Complete
Absent
Fail
Pass
39
Merit
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
9.8
37
13.7
52
73.8
279
1.9
7
0
0
0.8
3
MBBS Year 5
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Changes during the past year include:
1. Quality of student work is consistently high across all 3 modules.
2. Development of active working sub-groups in relation to preparation for the implementation of the New
Curriculum. Particularly for Module 5 B WHMH (changing from WHCD) and for the new Module 5 C “HOPE”. The
structure of Module 5A (CFHD) remains very similar for 2013-14 with the exception of increased Child &
Adolescent Mental Health Teaching.
3. Interdigitate Vertical Module (VM) teaching with the 3 horizontal modules of year 5 for 2013-14 has been
successful.
4. Introduction of a new end of term mock assessment day in WHCD comprising: a mock written SBA paper; a peer
led mock OSCE and the project presentations – now in Powerpoint format rather than a printed poster. Positive
feedback from students was received. This format is being adopted by Module 5C HOPE next year.
5. Updating and blueprinting of SBA bank, plus writing of new questions for WHMH.
Similar exercise to ensure quality of question bank will be undertaken for all 3 new modules in 2013-14.
6. Introduction of a new end of year exam comprising elements from all the modules in the year was successful.
Initial concerns over sufficient numbers of examiners from within the Module were not realized however this
should remain under review in light of the timing of the end of year exam within the school holiday period, together
with increasing difficulty within some Trusts for clinicians involved in teaching and assessment to be away from
their clinical sessions. The successful inclusion of real children within the OSCE was a significant advance.
7. The OSCE bank is in need of updating and a system of amalgamating these into a year 5 bank rather than 3
separate module banks is needed – work on this has started and will need to be a priority in the coming year
ahead of the Summer 2014 exams.
8. There is a need across all 3 modules to identify a core set of tutorials/seminars/ bedside teaching sessions that a
student can expect to receive, regardless of the site of their attachments. Currently, although there is parity of
experience, there is work to be done to ensure this is more obviously equivalent to the students.
9. Piloting multi-source feedback as a tool to derive placement grades has been successful in GU medicine, and is
being adopted as a mechanism to derive module grades across all 3 Year 5 modules in 2013-14.
10. A revision course was provided prior to exams, but the student society Med Soc also provided revision lectures in
the evenings and there is work to be done to ensure that such provision is compatible.
40
MBBS Year 5
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Key issues:
1. There are ongoing problems relating to room booking fairness across the different years of the curriculum. One
issue relates to classrooms and lecture theatres for Vertical Module and Core Introductory week teaching – where
clashes of requirements between years has been heightened because of refurbishment work at all 3 sites. A
second issue relates to sharing of clinical skills facilities which are dominated in the early weeks of the autumn
term by Year 4’s IOM leaving no real space for any year 5 activity. As a result skills’ training in WHMH has been
provided within the clinic space of a Trust. No clinical skills’ training was possible within the Year 5 IOM of 201314 because of the block booking by Year 4.
2. The temporary closure of some clinical space at the Whittington and at the Royal Free in the Spring of 2013
caused some difficulties in locating space for teaching, and potential for timetable confusion over venues and
timing of sessions. This is now resolved but should remain under review.
3. The Whittington Clinical Skills Centre closed towards the end of the Summer term, with new premises having
been identified within the Whittington main site. This did not cause any detriment to students.
4. The Module Lead for WHMH is in an Acting position and moves will need to occur during the Autumn of 2013 to
formalize this post.
5. There have been difficulties with the payments system for the Gynaecology Teaching Associates over the past
year (payment comes from the Whittington Trust via SIFT funding). Negotiations have been successful in
identifying a reliable payments process for the forthcoming year however this should remain under review to
ensure that there are no ongoing problems (which could result in this teaching resource being removed).
6. Barnet and Chase Farm are undergoing a merger of obstetric services which will need to be reflected in student
allocations and timetabling in the coming year.
7. The funding of private providers has required new approaches. This is an area the school will need to consider
increasingly given changing commissioning arrangements. This impacts upon gynaecology services within WHCD
(to become WHMH), termination services (for WHMH), psychiatry placements in CN (to become HOPE) and
hospice placements within HOPE in 2013-14.
8. WHCD (WHMH in 2013-14) midwifery tutors at the Whittington have had a change of site for their student
midwifery teaching components which may impact upon their timetables at the Whittington – this will remain under
review
9. The uncertainty of administrative support for CFHD at the Royal Free site continues to cause great anxiety. This is
hopefully going to be resolved satisfactorily soon.
10. A lot of the teaching activities within CFHD are supported by the academic clinical fellows, the number of which
has reduced over the last 6-12 months. Plan to invoke more help and contribution from the NHS as well as
academic staff from UCLH and ICH.
11. The lack of funding for Vertical module teachers has limited the ability to provide such teaching in small group
format in Year 5.
12. There is some uncertainty as to the number of PA sessions of consultant time that have been negotiated between
the medical school and its associated trusts. Clarity around this agreement would be helpful.
41
MBBS Year 5
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
1. Across all 3 modules, there is a need to ensure greater similarity of bedside and tutorial teaching across the
different sites providing this.
2. Feedback in Module A (CFHD) relating to outpatient teaching and communication skills teaching has improved.
3. Tutorial provision in Module B (WHCD) at Royal Free campus – occasional clashes of tutorial timetables and
clinical sessions caused confusion and difficulty for students. The Module Lead has re-organised the tutorial
timetable at the Free to address these problems to good effect on most occasions however this will need to
continue to be monitored by the Teaching Committee.
4. Access to women in labour continues to be a problem for some students across all sites. Midwifery leads at all
sites have worked hard to reinforce student learning needs and objectives with colleagues and to review
timetables to try and reduce potential difficulties with numbers of student midwives on site at same time. This is a
standing agenda item at UG Teaching Committee.
5. GP sessions in WHCD – occasional instances of cancellations by GP tutors at short notice, or of tutors giving
variable types of teaching (not all students saw patients, for instance). This has been addressed by the Primary
Care Lead in liaison with the GP tutors. Overall positive feedback by students regarding their GP session
experience.
6. Difficulties in sign-off by firm leads at the end of base campus placements was a particular problem at the Royal
Free in WHCD and was resolved by the introduction of a sessional sign-off to facilitate the evidence of attendance
which students could present to their firm leads. This issue will be addressed somewhat by the introduction of IPMSF assessment in the next academic year.
7. Within CN complaints about a specific consultant being unavailable for teaching have been addressed.
Mechanisms to identify teacher “no shows” need to be more robust.
8. The length of student on line evaluation questionnaires has become excessive, and students have reported losing
patience to complete them meaningfully as a result. Poor response rates have also been noted. For 2013-14 the
approach to the timing and volume of SEQ has been radically reconsidered.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
1. This year saw the first of the end of year examinations, run in parallel on all three sites. No particular concerns
over the WHCD content from the External examiners however they felt that it was very important that all
examiners on all three sites approached the marking process consistently for all students and this was fed back to
the Exam Board.
2. New external examiners have been appointed and a mechanism to ensure fair representation of the varied year 5
specialties by external examiners has been instituted.
3. Some issues to do with the wording of OSCE station instructions to candidates, the practicability of some of the
mannequins, and some SBA questions arose and were identified by the external examiners. Clarification of the
Standard Operating Procedure and of roles in relation to Year 5’s summative exams will help to avoid such issues
in future.
42
MBBS Year 5
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall departmental report)
The past year has been extremely busy with the development of the new end of year exam and updating of examination
banks in that respect, together with preparation work for the New Curriculum starting in September 2013. There has been
successful engagement with the Urology and Breast teams within WHMH ahead of 2013-14.
rd
HOPE will take the place of “CN” as the 3 module in year 5, and a lot of work has been undertaken to create a cohesive
module for students.
There has been productive work in relation to the development of a patient pathway in maternity and the newborn.
There has been a lot of development work ongoing in relation to the incorporation of several new teaching sessions
relating to Vertical Module themes both within the placements and as part of dedicated VM teaching days for the next
academic year (2013-14).
DGH placements generally receive good feedback from students and we will be looking to explore these in more detail
over the coming year, ideally with site visits (to include O&G and midwifery components).
A key aim for 2013-14 is to enhance methods of communication with DGH partners, through increased involvement in
MMGs and “road shows” to the DGH sites.
It should be noted that Professor Allan Maclean is planning to retire during February 2014 and a new WHMH site lead for
the Royal Free will need to be appointed. The Module Lead has had discussions in relation to this with the Director of the
IfWH and work will be in place in the Autumn of 2013 to move this forwards.
It has been challenging to accommodate the vertical module teaching space requirements for year 5 within the reduced
capacity of the Whittington campuses, and at the Royal Free campus because of lack of clarity around the full extent of
the spaces available. The site Sub Deans at both campuses have worked hard to find spaces to accommodate this
teaching and been successful. Hopefully this will set a precedent which will make such arrangements easier in the future.
43
MBBS Year 5
Title & Code of Module
Child and Family Health with Dermatology (CFHD)
Year
Module Organiser
Number Enrolled on Module
A. Quality of student work, pace and
any problems
MBBS Year 5
Dr Eddie Chung
378
Average Mark Gained
N/A
content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
The quality of student work has been maintained at an excellent level. The structure of the module has remained
relatively unchanged. Most of the teaching and clinical experience continues to be delivered/achieved by a combination of
clinical attachments, lectures and small group seminars. Feedback from students overall has been positive.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The uncertainty of administrative support at the Royal Free site continues to cause great anxiety. This is hopefully going
to be resolved satisfactorily soon.
A lot of the teaching activities are supported by the academic clinical fellows, the number of which has reduced over the
last 6-12 months. Plan to invoke more help and contribution from the NHS as well as academic staff from UCLH and ICH.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback on outpatient teaching and communication skills seminar has improved.
Ongoing effort in aligning the teaching material across the core sites should improve even further in the coming year.
Teaching in dermatology and community paediatrics continues to improve. We plan to increase the clinical experience in
these areas during the various clinical attachments including the general sites and general practice.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
We produced an end of year assessment in July 2013. Overall, this reduced the noise level during the OSCE and allowed
examination of children to be part of the summative assessment. Need to improve the bank of questions/stations and the
process of standard setting to make the assessment even more robust and reliable.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
More changes are due to take place in the next academic year. The introduction of the vertical module teaching will
require much planning and co-ordination between the various teams. Space/room booking will be a problem especially at
the Whittington site. A newly designed syllabus in child health should be available within the next few months which
should help students greatly in their studying and learning as well as blue-printing the relevant parts of the curriculum.
44
MBBS Year 5
Title & Code of Module
Clinical Neurosciences (Psychiatry/Neurology/Ophthalmology)
Year
MBBS Year 5
Module Organiser
Dr Chris Turner
Number Enrolled on Module
378
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Neurology/ophthalmology: In general, the students have all performed well in the year and enjoyed the course. The
students particularly enjoyed the weekly bedside teaching sessions with consultants and SpRs. The core lecture timetable
provided a good background to the clinical and practical work. The ophthalmology course is running a lot better than in
previous years, with most students enjoying their week and providing positive feedback. Cover of teaching has been
sparse in the past when tutors are on annual leave and therefore we have started a cover system which works well.
Psychiatry: In general feedback from clinical attachments was good. Feedback from the psychiatry teaching was good
rather than very good, and in the redesign for the new year 5 we have sought to include more videos/ interaction.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Neurology/Ophthalmology: The resources at Queen Square have been excellent. A shortage of lockers occurred due to
double the numbers of students but did not appear to interfere with teaching.
Psychiatry: None
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Neurology/Ophthalmology: There are on-going discussions with tutors regarding increasing demands on time and
expectations of students and the Medical School and yet there is lack of clarity of PAs and funding for their activity. There
needs to be greater transparency in the stream of funding for undergraduate teaching. The students suggested that there
were times when teaching did not occur and therefore a covering tutor system has been implemented.
Psychiatry: There were complaints about one named consultant not being available for teaching and I have taken this up.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Neurology/Ophthalmology: External Examiners made queries regarding the wording of some SBA questions and OSCE
stations which have been rectified.
Psychiatry: a few points about question wording.
45
MBBS Year 5
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Neurology/Ophthalmology: The Clinical Neurosciences course has worked well and it is unfortunate that it has been
broken up for the forthcoming years as part of NC4.
Psychiatry: I agree it has worked well, and combining neurology and psychiatry made sense.
46
MBBS Year 5
Title & Code of Module
Women’s Health and Communicable Diseases (WHCD)
Year
MBBS Year 5
Module Organiser
Dr Melissa Whitten
Number Enrolled on Module
378
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Changes during the past year include:
1. Development of active working sub-groups (Urology, Breast, Patient Pathway) in relation to preparation for the
implementation of the New Curriculum.
2. Introduction of a new end of term mock assessment day comprising: a mock written SBA paper (contributed to by
the O&G MedSoc), a mock OSCE (piloted in the previous year by the MedSoc) and the project presentations –
now in Powerpoint format rather than a printed poster. Positive feedback from students received.
3. Updating and blueprinting of SBA bank, plus writing of new questions.
4. Introduction of a new end of year exam comprising elements from all the modules in the year. Initial concerns over
sufficient numbers of examiners from within the Module were not realized however this should remain under
review in light of the timing of the end of year exam within the school holiday period, together with increasing
difficulty within some Trusts for clinicians involved in teaching and assessment to be away from their clinical
sessions.
5. The OSCE bank was noted to be in urgent need of updating – work on this has started and will need to be a
priority in the coming year ahead of the Summer 2014 exams.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
1. Funding was successfully obtained from the School for the Clinical Skills Centres to purchase new mannequins
for simulated clinical skills teaching for this module for all students, to start being used in Sept 2013.
2. The temporary closure of some clinical space at the Whittington and at the Royal Free in the Spring of 2013
caused some difficulties in locating space for teaching, and potential for timetable confusion over venues and
timing of sessions. This is now resolved but should remain under review.
3. The Whittington Clinical Skills Centre closed towards the end of the Summer term, with new premises having
been identified within the Whittington main site. This did not cause any detriment to students.
4. The Module Lead is in an Acting position and moves will need to occur during the Autumn of 2013 to formalize
this post.
5. There have been difficulties with the payments system for the Gynaecology Teaching Associates over the past
year (payment comes from the Whittington Trust via SIFT funding). Negotiations have been successful in
identifying a reliable payments process for the forthcoming year however this should remain under review to
ensure that there are no ongoing problems (which could result in this teaching resource being removed).
6. Barnet and Chase Farm are undergoing a merger of obstetric services which will need to be reflected in student
allocations and timetabling in the coming year.
7. Barnet has a private contract for provision of gynaecological services which could impact upon student learning
opportunities. We have been assured by the local site lead that there is an educational contract within the
agreement to protect student teaching however this will remain under review in the coming year.
8. Our midwifery tutors at the Whittington have had a change of site for their student midwifery teaching components
which may impact upon their timetables at the Whittington – this will remain under review.
47
MBBS Year 5
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
1. Tutorial provision for O&G at Royal Free campus – occasional clashes of tutorial timetables and clinical sessions
caused confusion and difficulty for students. The Module Lead has re-organised the tutorial timetable at the Free
to address these problems to good effect on most occasions however this will need to continue to be monitored
by the Teaching Committee.
2. Access to labouring women continues to be a problem for some students across all sites. Midwifery leads at all
sites have worked hard to reinforce student learning needs and objectives with colleagues and to review
timetables to try and reduce potential difficulties with numbers of student midwives on site at same time. This is a
standing agenda item at UG Teaching Committee.
3. GP sessions – occasional instances of cancellations by GP tutors at short notice, or of tutors giving variable types
of teaching (not all students saw patients, for instance). This has been addressed by the Primary Care Lead in
liaison with the GP tutors. Overall good feedback by students regarding their GP session experience.
4. Difficulties in sign-off by firm leads at the end of base campus placements – this was a particular problem at the
Royal Free and was resolved by the introduction of a sessional sign-off to facilitate the evidence of attendance
which students could present to their firm leads. This issue will be addressed somewhat by the introduction of IPMSF assessment in the next academic year.
5. The Module Lead visited the Royal Free consultants as part of their regular meeting programme during the early
Sumer of 2013 to discuss issues relating to teaching, and this will become a regular event each term.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
1. This year saw the first of the end of year examinations, run in parallel on all three sites. No particular concerns
over the WHCD content from the External examiners however they felt that it was very important that all
examiners on all three sites approached the marking process consistently for all students and this was fed back to
the Exam Board.
2. A new external O&G examiner was appointed this year. CD, the acting External Examiner provided support an
exceptional fourth year. There will need to be an appointment of a new second external examiner for the 2013-14
exams, in line with the change of the content of the module to incorporate Urology and Breast.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall departmental report)
The past year has been extremely busy with the development of the new end of year exam and updating of examination
banks in that respect, together with preparation work for the New Curriculum starting in September 2013. There has been
successful engagement with the Urology and Breast teams ahead of 2013-14, and productive work in relation to the
development of a patient pathway in maternity and the newborn.
Further to this there has been a lot of development work ongoing in relation to the incorporation of several new teaching
sessions relating to Vertical Module themes both within the placements and as part of dedicated VM teaching days for the
next academic year (2013-14).
DGH placements generally receive good feedback from students and we will be looking to explore these in more detail
over the coming year, ideally with site visits (to include O&G and midwifery components).
It should be noted that Professor Allan Maclean is planning to retire during February 2014 and a new site lead for the
Royal Free will need to be appointed. The Module Lead has had discussions in relation to this with the Director of the
IfWH and work will be in place in the Autumn of 2013 to move this forwards.
48
MBBS Year 5
MBBS Year 6
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
49
MBBS Year 6
Faculty of Medical Sciences: MBBS Year 6 Programme Organiser Proforma
Title & Code of Degree
Programme
Programme Organiser
Number Enrolled on programme
MBBS
Dr Aroon Lal
370
Average Mark Gained
Programme Statistics
Percentage Distribution
Not Complete
Absent
Fail 0-20
Fail 21-34
Pass
Class 3
Class 2.2
Class 2.1
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Number of Students
%
Number
10.3
38
9.7
36
79.2
293
0.3
1
0
0
0.5
2
Class 1
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
75.1 (written papers)
77.0 (OSCE)
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
The quality of student work and progression has been excellent as indicated by the statistics above. The Final Year
continues to concentrate on learning by an assistantship/apprenticeship model with students spending time in the clinical
environment, learning from other doctors, healthcare professionals and patients. This is supplemented by structured “core
teaching”, twilight teaching from junior doctors and electronic resources (most notably Case of the Month).
For the first time this year, there was a “post-Finals’ SSC placement. Many of these modules were run for the first time
and provided innovative ways of preparing the students for practice as a doctor. Several clearly showed an increase in
confidence of the students for the forthcoming Foundation year.
50
MBBS Year 6
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken
or planned
There are three main challenges to the provision of the Final Year:
IT access: Students require a reliable and fast access to the educational resources provided by the Medical School (Case
of the Month, Moodle, examination and placement information). An ongoing review of IT provision at DGH sites has been
conducted, culminating in clear guidelines for minimum standards of provision. DGH sites have largely either met these
standards, or have clear plans to do so.
More challenging is the increasing use of IT for patient records and Imaging. Access is often controlled by Smart cards
and there is, as yet, no practicable way of issuing these to all students.
Accommodation: Standards of accommodation continue to improve and regular visits to DGH sites ensure this is kept
under regular review.
Service re-configuration: The NHS is at a time of great change and several of our DGH sites are in the midst of reorganization leading to the loss or transfer of services. Undergraduate leads at each site have kept the Medical School
informed of relevant changes and these have been clearly communicated to the undergraduates.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Overall evaluation of the course has been excellent with 91% of graduates rating it as good or excellent preparation for
their career as a doctor and 90% rating the quality as good or excellent.
The timing of the final MB BS has been somewhat contentious. Students felt that an opportunity to re-attempt the
examination would be advantageous, but the move of finals this year has raised the criticism that there was too little time
to prepare. For the 2014-15 year, this will be addressed by a major re-organization of the final year to allow for the final
MB to be taken in March, with clear “private study’ before the examination.
D.
Issues
Identified
External
Examiners
action taken
orsites,
planned
There
remains
some by
variation
in the
standardsand
of teaching
across
but regular dissemination of feedback and good
practice is leading to increasing standardization of the student experience.
None
Other issues raised generally concerned accommodation and IT provision (covered in B above)
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
This year was the first in which the Final MB BS examination was moved to an earlier date in order to allow for students
who failed on the first attempt to have the opportunity to re-take the examination within the same academic year. In the
end, this was not utilized. The re-scheduling did allow for the introduction of a “Post-Finals” SSC placement. There were
challenges in ensuring that this was taken seriously by the students, but attendance and feedback were good. Some
DGH sites introduced “Preparation for Practice” SSCs which proved successful in improving the confidence of students
for their forthcoming Foundation placement. Several commented that these were amongst their best experience in the
MBBS course.
The success of the Final Year depends upon the commitment of the students and administrative teams at the Medical
School and the DGH sites. Chief amongst these are the new administrative team of Chloe Marshall and Jane Rowles and
the Teaching Fellows attached to the Final Year; Sarah Bennett and LJ Smith
51
MBBS Year 6
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
See above: Timing of finals changed and post-finals SSC introduced.
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
52
MBBS Year 6
Title & Code of Module
Electives
Year
MBBS Year 6
Module Organiser
Dr Jane Zuckerman
Number Enrolled on Module
370
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The students continue to enjoy the Elective module which affords them the opportunity to experience the practice of
medicine in a variety of different countries and often, experience in Global Health.
Students receive advice and approval for their electives on Tuesdays throughout the year. When appropriate, advice was
on occasion relayed via email and then confirmed at the elective approval meeting. The elective approval meetings are
face to face meetings to ensure that where appropriate, students receive guidance regarding health and safety aspects of
the elective period (occupational and travel related) e.g. the procedure to follow if exposure to a blood borne virus were to
occur. Academic guidance was provided similarly regarding the elective project which is completed in order to provide an
assessment of the six week elective attachment together with the supervisor’s report on the student’s clinical abilities. The
lecture on the elective period was given in December to students progressing through Year 4 to Year 5 to enable them to
understand the process of application to host institutions as well as the elective approval process as a whole well in
advance. The same structure for the lecture session was applied as previously with the lecture being divided into distinct
sessions with an overarching introductory session followed by a session for those planning an elective in North America
and a separate session on those planning an elective in Australia, New Zealand or Europe. Attendance at these lectures
was noted and accepted as initial elective approval having been obtained. All the lectures were followed by a question
and answer session which was well received.
The elective projects were marked by the Sub Dean for Electives and a teaching fellow in Primary Care. The standard of
the submitted elective projects remains unchanged with the majority attaining a grade C. The annual award of a first and
second elective prize was made.
The method of assessment of the elective period is to be reviewed with the likelihood of replacing the written project with
an e portfolio initiative within the next couple of years.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The web-based learning materials which provide specific guidance regarding the learning objectives of the elective
continue to be updated annually to reflect any changes in the procedure to be followed to obtain elective approval.
Lectures followed immediately with a question and answer session held over a period of 2 hours in December continues
to be well received by students
53
MBBS Year 6
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Appointments continue to be available on Tuesdays throughout the year which enables students to receive advice and
approval. Students are well supported by the Electives Administrator.
The elective information provided on the 3 Year 5 web site continues to be updated and reflect any additional information
regarding the approval process and any specific issues and requirements at elective placements which have come to our
attention.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
54
MBBS Year 6
Title & Code of Module
Final Year GP Assistantship
Year
MBBS Year 6
Module Organiser
Dr Richard Meakin
Number Enrolled on Module
370
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Final Year GP Assistantship is a 4-week out-of-London course, including a departmental introductory and debriefing
day. Teaching methods include presentations by GPs and Foundation Year doctors to large groups, and small group work
for simulated actor role-play, significant event analysis and mock OSCE practice. One-to-one teaching occurs in the GP
practice.
As reported last year that the medical school based teaching on the final day needed updating. This was implemented
this year. This has gone well but feedback suggests that the SJT exercise may be less useful. Action – SJT component
will be reviewed.
The collective teaching of students at Luton and Stevenage practices has been reviewed. The collective teaching at the
Luton collective was peer reviewed and found to be good. However, collective teaching was found to be financially
unsustainable due to the higher cost per student compared to teaching at other practices especially at the Stevenage.
Action: In consultation with the Vice –Dean for Community –based Teaching it was decided that with effect from the next
academic year teaching at Luton and Stevenage practices would be on the same basis as in other practices.
Assessments are formative. All students complete supervised written work and present this work to the GP and practice
team. A prize was awarded for the best clinical audit and the best healthcare needs assessment completed during the
year. GP tutors were informed of these awards.
The pace, content, teaching methods and assessments are appropriate to senior clinical students, focusing on clinical
method, clinical communication skills, communication with colleagues, professional development and reflective learning in
preparation for the Foundation Year.
Where GP Tutors or students have raised concerns, these issues have been addressed and followed up by the course
team and where necessary in collaboration with the student welfare tutors.
Overall number of self-reported student-led consultations during the rotation has risen, 65.2% >25 consultations, 29.8%
11-25 consultations, 5% <11 consultations.
GP Tutors have been supported and encouraged to attend educational events to develop their role, e.g. Annual GP
Tutors’ Conference and Year 5 GP Workshop.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None
55
Year 6
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students’ overall impression of the placement remains very good, with 89.5% giving a positive rating (64.1% excellent
and 25.4% good with a 51% response rate).
There was one poorly rated practice.
Action: The practice was contacted by the team and appropriate advice, support or action taken. The practice will
continue to be monitored closely.
18 confidential comments were made: 6 of which were very positive comments.
Five tutors received specific adverse confidential comments.
Action: These were followed-up by the Year 5 GP course organiser. These were mainly specific issues related to
teaching or assessment.
Other less specific confidential comments have been addressed in covering letters to all tutors, newsletters, website
updates.
There were comments regarding course administration which related to problems in the first rotation with new forms.
Action: The problem was resolved for subsequent rotations.
The tutor who was suspected of sexual harassment mentioned in the AMR 2009-10 had 4 students this year. There have
been no concerns raised. Action: We will continue to monitor this tutor.
Travel costs remain an issue (41.2% reported spending over £100 during the rotation). 86.8% were not intending to try
and claim for travel expenses from any source.
Action: We continue to raise student awareness of Welfare Clinic for advice on eligibility for reimbursement of travel
costs.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
56
Year 6
MBBS Vertical Modules
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
57
Vertical Modules
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Vertical Module Programme Organiser Proforma
Title & Code of Module/ Course
MBBS
Year
Year 1-6
Course Organiser
Dr Will Coppola
Number Enrolled on Course
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
While this is a very diverse programme, generally students have received balanced and varied teaching using a number
of methods, including small group work, large group work, lectures, and recorded and E-learning materials. There have
been no significant concerns about the pace or content, although new modules will be making some revision in the light of
student and tutor feedback. VM has not featured in the assessment as much as its footprint I the curriculum would
suggest, and this will be addressed over the coming year, with appropriate blueprinting
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There are a number of significant space and facility issues that have hindered the delivery of Vertical modules:
Space. Even disregarding the temporary loss of space due to building works on all 3 campuses, space is particularly short
at the Royal Free and Whittington campuses. The new student hub at the Whittington has only 4 teaching rooms, in
contrast to the 8 rooms needed for group teaching in years 1 and 2, and results in a substantial challenge to the delivery
of the programme
AV facilities are inadequate, and have insufficient local support. We are a paper light module, and tutors need AV
equipment in all teaching rooms (presently not the case). AV support is very patchy, and despite significant efforts early in
the year, is now sub-standard at the Royal Free campus, and equipment problems have been frequent at Bloomsbury.
Rationalisation of Turning point software and computer desktops is needed as a priority.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The VM Moodle presence was confusing to students, and this has been resolved by using a small TEDI fund with student
involvement to re-design it from the ground up, which is already receiving favourable comments.
Some feedback was received from students about the complexity of timetabling issues across the years, and in the VM
programme we are reviewing our administrative procedures to try and address this.
The majority of feedback has been positive, and helpful, from both students and staff, and will be incorporated into our
module review
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
New integrated OSCE station incorporating SDH , UoE and com skills praised by examiners
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
Development of new VM programme for Year 5 going well
New Preparation for practice SSCs being developed for 2014/15 for new final year curriculum
Administrative support for non-central VMs needs further work and identification of faculty resource
Additional senior academic leadership based on each campus, to be appointed with content and leadership roles.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
58
Vertical Modules
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the
PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their updated PSs by email
each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to the Academic Support website.
N/A
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;


Medical School Annual Return (MSAR), December 2012.
Regional GMC QA visit November 2012.
The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
The GMC review was completed in the Autumn of 2012. The main outcome showed that there were no serious concerns
with our MBBS Programme. We were given one requirement to improve the quantity and quality of feedback on
assessments, in particular on summative assessments. There were a number of commendations, and a small number of
recommendations, for which we are developing and implementing an action plan.
The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme: Expected date of next MSAR
st
due 31 December 2013
59
Vertical Modules
Vertical Module Lead Reports
Title & Code of Module
Anatomy and Imaging
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Prof. Chris Dean, Dr Navin Ramachandran
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
This course ran for the first time in 2012-13. We designed 30 clinical scenarios as the basis for 10 consecutive 15 minute
tutorial rotations per session on applied clinical anatomy and imaging during the first week of each of the 3 Year 4 clinical
Modules. Teaching sessions were held in the Anatomy Lab and students attended for a morning three times during Year
4 in October, January and May.
Attendance was better at the beginning of the year with 10-20% absent at some sessions in May 2013. The teaching
feedback from staff was positive. We will refine the number of scenarios and the time spent on each during 2013-14
depending on the numbers of teachers available at each session.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The Lab facilities and technical support were excellent.
Provision of this Module depends on availability of appropriately qualified teachers. We are working on ways to involve
more UCLH staff in these sessions and on ways to find more clinical anatomists.
As far as we are aware, no fte contribution to Biosciences towards demonstrator costs and Lab costs incurred during
2012-13 have been transferred from the Medical School. Continuing provision of this course depends upon this funding
source.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback about this new course was apparently positive (student questionnaire responses are not sent directly to
course organizers) but some students asked at one point to have fewer but longer case-based rotations during the
morning.
We will consider this.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
60
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Clinical Skills and Practical Procedures
Year
MBBS
Module Organiser
Dr Alison Sturrock
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Quality of student work good.
No problems with appropriateness of teaching methods reported.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Non reported
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
More time to perform clinical skills requested.
Vertical Module timetable being renewed.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
NA
61
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Pathological Sciences
Year
MBBS Years 1,2,4,5
Module Organiser
Dr Kate Ward
Number Enrolled on Module
All MB BS students
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Year 1 & 2 teaching - has received consistent positive comment both from students and from colleagues. As well as the
ongoing commitment to the Infection and Defence module, Pathological Sciences teachers contribute significant sessions
on other modules. In addition to his role in Infection and Defence, Professor Delves led on formative assessment, and
satisfactory results were achieved.
The change in the format of student feedback for Years 1, 2 remains a major issue. Lecturers no longer receive individual
ratings. Outstanding teachers are easily identified from general comments but other lecturers have been disappointed by
the lack of specific feedback. Without such feedback it is not possible to drive quality of teaching, to support teachers in
the early stages of their career or help and advise failing teachers. In the absence of such feedback there is a very real
risk that teachers may feel undervalued or under motivated, and certainly will be unaware of "blind spots" in their
teaching. This problem has been reported to the Quality Assurance Unit.
Year 4 teaching – Because of the implementation of the new Year 4 curriculum the Pathological Sciences teaching week
has been replaced by a Core Teaching Week. A lot of hard work and planning paid off and the Core Teaching Weeks ran
smoothly. Feedback on Pathological Sciences lectures and tutorials in the Core teaching weeks was initially not available
due to changes in feedback instituted by the QA Dept. After discussion with that Department it was decided to design an
Opinio survey specifically for Pathological Sciences to be administered by Ms B Nikolic. This was successfully introduced
for block 2 and was modified for block 3 to include all topics in the Core teaching week at the request of the leads for
modules A, B, & C. The availability of additional material on Moodle and the newly introduced Pathological Sciences
Workbooks were appreciated by the students. Individualised feedback from student questionnaires has been given to all
teachers by the Chair; any particular issues were drawn to the attention of the lecturers.
Module C gave problems because there were too many peel off activities during the clinical attachments. This led to a
decision to change the clinical attachments in the forthcoming academic year and the Chair was asked to reschedule and
reduce the Pathological Sciences contribution to the Cross Specialty teaching. This rescheduling is in place for next year.
Year 5 teaching - continued with little change. Dr Balakrishnan remained the lead for Communicable Diseases.
New curriculum – The main issue of the year was planning for NC5. This was an onerous task due to unanticipated last
minute changes but Pathological Sciences contributions to all 3 modules are now in place.
The support, hard work and commitment of the Pathological Sciences Teaching Group was outstanding throughout a very
busy year involving much complicated planning and reorganisation for NC5. The problem of double running for teaching
of communicable diseases was accepted without complaint. The enormous contribution of Teaching Administration was
essential for the smooth running of this complex vertical spine.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Problems with the Lecturecast recording failure at the Royal Free and Bloomsbury site as a result of local AV issues. Both
video content and sound were missing on some of the recordings. Concerns were raised with senior staff overseeing AV
support to ensure that the support for IT and AV is available for Lecturecast. We have been reassured that there will soon
be a system in place to support this and hopefully prevent the recent problems. Apart from lack of proper AV support
another common problem is no sound because teachers do not use the hand held microphone. Reminders about
Lecturecast are sent routinely to all teachers involved in the Core Teaching Weeks. In the coming academic year the
Chair will take every opportunity to remind teachers about the microphone during the Core Teaching Week and audit
Lecturecast sessions giving feedback where appropriate. She will also ask students in the audience to remind lecturers
about the microphone
62
Vertical Modules
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Issues raised by students have been acted upon including those raised at a meeting to review the introduction of the Year
4 new curriculum. Unfortunately there were no student representatives this year despite repeated requests for some from
the Chair to the Staff Student Liaison Committee.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
63
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Use Of Evidence
Year
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Module Organiser
Dr Mark Griffin
Number Enrolled on Module
~340
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Feedback from tutors involved in delivery of the sessions has indicated that most students have coped well with all the
materials and the tasks assigned to them during the teaching sessions.
As with many subjects and given the diversity of student backgrounds some students find the exercises set during large
group work sessions (LGW) fairly straightforward whilst others find them more challenging. During the sessions tutors are
able to give individual assistance to students to ensure those who are in need of more help can be given individual
support and assistance. Additionally, tutors review with the group answers to exercises and summarise concepts
throughout the sessions.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The resources, rooms and facilities have all been adequate. On occasions some rooms for the LGW sessions have been
a little cramped for the number of students. These have been flagged through the year and action taken to utilise rooms
suitable for the numbers of students.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
No overall major issues have been identified. As mentioned above (A) some students note that the sessions are relatively
easy whilst others struggle more with the concepts. Teaching staff endeavour to give individual support to those who find
materials a greater challenge. Exercises are designed in such a way that they build concepts gradually to enable
consolidation of concepts and gradual progression to the more complex materials, thus enabling students with a range of
abilities to feel engaged by the set tasks.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
64
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Use of Medicines
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Prof. Raymond MacAllister
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Prescribing Skills – Removed from the VM timetable and now sits within Module A. Sessions take place 3 times per
block (9 times per year) from 9-1pm on a Tuesday morning. Students receive a lecture followed by small group work in
which they undertake prescribing scenarios. Following block 1, sessions were shortened from a whole day with a slight
change in format and feedback indicated that this was better received. There are plans to change the day on which
these sessions take place next year due to clinical commitments of teaching staff.
Use of Medicines – The Taught Course in Medicine and Therapeutics has been removed from the curriculum and
replaced with one long afternoon of teaching at the end of each 12 week block. Feedback regarding content has been
positive with students indicating that sessions were pitched at the right level.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Permanently installed TurningPoint software (used for week 12 sessions) is only available in three lecture theatres at
Bloomsbury. It is important that these venues are made available to us if possible for these sessions in the coming
year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback obtained throughout the year has indicated that students are very concerned about the reduction in Use of
Medicines teaching which has stemmed from the curriculum changes implemented at the start of the year. The Taught
Course in Medicine which previously took place every Thursday afternoon has been removed from the curriculum, and
although videos from the previous year are available, new developments mean that some information is now out of
date. Students would also prefer this teaching to be better spaced throughout the year rather than at the end of each
block.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
The overwhelming consensus is that the Taught Course in Medicine and Therapeutics lecture series should be
reinstated.
65
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Mental Health
Year
MBBS Year 1 and 4
Module Organiser
Dr Claudia Cooper and Dr Amanda Williams
Number Enrolled on Module
Approx. 360
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Many of the sessions that involved small group work and this was generally well received. In sessions that are taught by
VM tutors, it is clearly important the tutors receive course literature in a timely manner and have an opportunity to ask
questions. We will try to ensure that the have two weeks’ notice next year, and a named person with email to contact with
any questions.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
We were unclear on lines of responsibility in the module, which is collaboration between psychiatry and psychology, so
met with the VM Lead to resolve this.
Mental Health sciences unit were unaware that one of their administrators was administering the module, but this issue is
now resolved.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The students reported that they would prefer the MHA teaching to be nearer to psychiatry placements i.e. in Year 5. We
have changed this now. In doing so it came to light that some of material in VM appeared to replicate Ethics And Law
teaching and we resolved this through discussion with Jane Kavanagh.
The students thought there were too many “introductions” in Year 1. This was mainly an issue of lecture titles as the
content in each session was relevant and did not overlap. The introduction to psychiatry part of the title to all in the mind
lecture has been removed now.
Feedback in term 1 was helpful and positive; there was too little in term 2 to act on. This is part of a larger issue of finding
ways to motivate students to feed back on all lectures.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Dr Claudia Cooper took over as psychiatry lead in March 2013. We have clarified lines of responsibility, and are happy to
be collaborating to deliver this module.
We have changed some of the sessions in this module:
 MHA and capacity teaching has now moved elsewhere as discussed, and we are introducing a new depression
lecture in Year 4. So now there will be year 4 modules in anxiety and depression which seems appropriate as
these are the most common mental health problems in general hospitals.
 We will introduce a new format schizophrenia and psychosis teaching session in Year 2, which includes small
group teaching.
66
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Social Determinants of Health
Year
1, 2, 4, 5, 6
Module Organiser
Dr Anita Berlin
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
This is a new module – incorporating some existing teaching from the previous syllabus and some additional themes.
Student engagement with the topics is generally good but attendance can be variable. Most students find the module very
worthwhile while a few struggle to see its value. A priority is to make the teaching more relevant and interactive. The
lecture by Prof Michael Marmot singled out for praise.
Year 1 & 2: New interactive global health session and new collaboration teaching between sociology and community
placements introduced. A successful small group Synthesis half day ended Year 1 with the help of the VM tutors.
Year 4: Highly successful, informative and moving interactive session with advocates from the Camden Homeless and TB
project introduced. Other small group work introduced in Health Equity this year but needs some revision
Year 5: New Country Study introduced to add academic component to electives linked to Global Health and heath
systems components of SDH module and Ethics And Law. The study was successfully completed by all students, some
to a very high standard.
Year 6: A review was undertaken of SDH to incorporate in Year 6 inc electives
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
In general rooms and AV support have been good. Some lack of clarity regarding timetables and administration caused
confusion to students and staff but these are being address.
Availability of tutors for small group work and providing feedback for portfolio submission is a challenge. As most of the
groupings in that make up the VM have no clinical locus finding tutors with relevant experience is more difficult than for
clinical field.
67
Vertical Modules
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
General for the SDH module:
Student feedback, especially the on-line feedback for SDH is very general. Good teachers are singled out but it does not
provide useful feedback for individual course components or teachers. The main messages are that students request
more small groups teaching and value VM tutors.
Students reported frustrations with Moodle and timetables: ACTION being addressed by VM lead.
Year 1 & 2: Prof Marmot lecture very popular and Prof Scambler praised by a few students. Some poor lecturing practice
identified by students especially dense, monotonous slides lacking relevance. ACTION: Feedback to lecturers and
support regarding good practice in PowerPoint and large group teaching for CALT Teaching Fellow
Year 4: The Homelessness/TB sessions effective and popular. SWOT sessions needs revision. ACTION: The health
inequalities session undergoing major review. The Health economics leads is devising an on-line support
package
Year 5: Global Health project work and presentations increasingly unpopular with some students. We have no feedback
on the new Country Study ACTION: the whole of the Year 5 Global Health teaching has been revised for 201314 to make it more focused on student learning of core
Year 6: The academic component of the Elective has been fully revised. ACTION: New “Elective Report” introduced
2013-14.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
New integrated OSCE station incorporating SDH , UoE and com skills praised by examiners .
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Negotiation for appropriate admin support was successful but slow. The module will strive to increase relevance and
interactive teaching despite absence of financial motivation to do so. (Lecture accrue same funding and small groups)
68
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Student Selected Components
MBBS Year 1,2 and 6
Dr Greg Campbell (Year 1 and 2)
Dr Will Coppola and Dr Aroon Lal (Year 6)
Number Enrolled on Module
370
Average Mark Gained N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The majority of Year 1/2 SSCs received good to excellent feedback from the students. Due to the large range of topics
and tutors for SSCs there is naturally a variation in the nature and pace of work involved. Students, however, generally
cope well with this and their performance and achievement are good.
Two first year students failed a taught SSC but passed the referred assessment at the maximum D bare pass.
Three students submitted their coursework late and so received a lower grade.
This year, SSCs in Year 6 fall into two categories. As previously, there is a “pre-Finals SSC” placement where students
choose to pursue an aspect of medicine or relevant topic in more detail. This year 100 different SSCs were available,
which is an increase on last year, and a loosening of the principle of restricting numbers to a smaller number of key
providers. We will keep this under review when planning for 2014-15
For the first time this year, there was a “post-Finals’ SSC placement. Many of these modules were run for the first time
and provided innovative ways of preparing the students for practice as a doctor. Several clearly showed an increase in
confidence of the students for the forthcoming Foundation 1 year. In 2014-15, we will ensure that all post-finals SSCs are
designed primarily around preparation for practice, which will mean that some of the existing SSCs will not be suitable for
this slot, but can still be offered pre-finals. We anticipate that DGHs will offer a number of post-finals SSCs in the future.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There was a wide choice of Year 1 and 2 SSCs available this year due to 19 new SSCs being offered. Most new tutors
were from the Faculty of Medical Sciences but a few were from the Faculty of Brain Sciences and 2 existing Faculty of
Life Science tutors offered new SSCs. Year 1, block 1 SSCs continue to be the most difficult to attract tutors. Many
students gained their first or second choice but some had to be allocated their third choice. The Language Centre
continues to offer a good selection of SSCs and this year related them more closely to medicine and have re-arranged the
workload of the Year 1 double block SSC so that students are less pressured in block 2 during revision. There is still a
shortage of teaching rooms for SSCs, exacerbated by the college closing many. SSC financing is not transparent enough
and some tutors and divisional managers remain unclear of the value of offering SSCs.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
A number of comments and suggestions in the student questionnaires were useful and were fed back to tutors. Tutors
were keen to see these and to act on them. Some students were confused about choosing SSC domains that were
introduced this year. Others had not realized that SSCs in block 2 of Year 1 or in Year 2 generally differ from those in
Year 1 block 1 – as they were told in the IOM week. This will be made clear on the new guidelines. At the SSCC meetings
students were happy with the allocation of SSCs.
Students gave very favourable feedback in general on their final year SSCs, with no major issues identified. 89% of
students rated their final year SSC to be 4 or 5 out of 5 in terms of overall satisfaction.
69
Vertical Modules
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
None identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
70
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Portfolios
Year
MBBS Years 1,2,4 and 5
Module Organiser
Dr Will Coppola
Number Enrolled on Module
700
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Y1 and 2 Most students completed their assignments by the April deadline, but a few needed reminders after this, and a
very few were close to the exam board progression deadline. Quality was generally good
Y4 and 5 Most students satisfactorily completed the minimum requirements. Those that did not were identified throughout
the year and at exam board. Action taken as per regulations.
Ongoing work to ensure SLEs are useful to students – requires change in attitude of faculty as well as student body which
is certainly happening (as seen from anecdotal reports, data from questionnaires and focus groups and decrease in
number of emails highlighting problems).
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Y1 and 2 Some delay to the opening of the Moodle sites due to change of governance of the module and shortage of
resources, resulting in some deadlines being pushed back.
Y4 and 5 Problems due to NES not delivering on agreed work to agreed timescales. This impacted the student
experience as forms were not appropriately worded for the relevant year, did not auto-populate data and did not generate
reports (Year 5).
Action taken: students and staff were informed of these issues, multiple discussions were conducted throughout the year
with NES, and contingency plans were enacted when additional admin input required to create accounts. New forms were
created (aligning with New Curriculum) with a long lead in, and are ready to go for the start of the new academic year
2013-14. No further changes should be necessary in the near future. The relationship with NES is under constant review
as we await to heat the outcome of their consultation and plans for the future.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Y1 and 2 Some problems with students wishing to amend their submissions, or re-submit. There were technical solutions
to this which were implemented and explained to students online.
Y4 and 5 Questionnaires and focus groups revealed problems with students’ understanding of the purpose of the
ePortfolio and the lack of awareness of information available to them.
Students identified the fact that some asseessors were not familiar with SLEs or the ePortfolio, and in these cases
feedback was of poor quality.
Actions taken: ePortfolio UCL website pages fully updated, adding video screenshots, summaries, and new FAQs.
Advertising of these pages in lectures in IOM for Y4,5 and 6. Advertising of these pages to tutors/assessors will occur in
2013-14. A workshop will be run at the GP Conference for those unfamiliar with the ePortfolio as it will be used in Y6 for
the first time in 2013-14.
71
Vertical Modules
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
N/A
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
72
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Patient Pathway in Integrated and Community Care
Year
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Module Organiser
Dr Shirley Cupit
Number Enrolled on Module
All
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Experiential learning in these placements and community visitor sessions, combined with reflective group work and
portfolio exercises, proved to be a very effective teaching method. It offered opportunities for learning directly from
members of the public and professions and for making sense of academic learning in other topics.
Many Year 1 students referred to either their visitor sessions or their placement visits in their VM assignments, and had
clearly reflected deeply about their experiences. The breadth of learning was significant; students reflected on their ability
to communicate, health and illness within the wider narrative of peoples’ lives, how health services can impact on quality
of life, how social conditions can impact on peoples’ health.
Feedback from Year 2 students demonstrated that disability workshops had stimulated new thinking and broader
understanding of disability related issues.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Severe problems with a/v equipment in Cruciform LT 1 prevented full delivery of key lecture in FHMP module.
Last-minute timetabling changes created considerable problems for the organization of community placements and
student allocations, and necessitated re-allocation of all Year 1 students at short notice.
Information on Room Bookings site was not accurate e.g. some rooms in Cruciform were designated as suitable for
wheelchair use when they were not. Corrections have now been made on the site.
The Rockefeller building and some tutorial rooms in the Cruciform do not have good disability access, making
involvement and hosting of individuals affected by disability in teaching sessions a challenging business. This was
exacerbated by lack of staff availability to offer appropriate personal and administrative support at all 3 sites when
community visitors and disabled workshop providers were on site. This has been reported to the VM lead and solutions
for the forthcoming year are being sought. The hosting issue is not yet resolved and potentially compromises our capacity
to deliver this teaching.
Changes to the Opinio SEQs meant we were unable to link student feedback to specific visitors/workshops. We could not
pass on or discuss individual feedback with patient or professional visitors, which is an important part of our QA and PPI
strategy and helps in recruitment of suitable participants to provide consistently high quality learning opportunities.
Following discussions with the QAU, a new approach has been agreed to resolve this next year.
73
Vertical Modules
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback overwhelmingly demonstrated how much they valued, enjoyed and learnt from their community focused
experiences. Key positive themes were: opportunities to practice and improve communication skills; learning from talking
to both professionals and service users; developing insight; finding out about community care and services; learning from
their mistakes; finding situations challenging but productive; the benefits and challenges of team work with peers. For
some students these experiences clearly provided transformative learning opportunities.
The most common request for change by students was for longer or more frequent placements. Though gratifying to hear
this is not viable with current resources.
A small minority of students did not value the use of social care environments for placements and/or misunderstood the
purpose of placements as being for clinical experience. The contribution of community services to health and well-being
and the importance of multi-agency liaison is well rehearsed in lecture and SGW content – VM tutors will be asked to
reinforce this message next year and students will be encouraged to read course materials.
Occasionally student feedback indicated problems with specific community services e.g. poor organisation, lack of staff
support. These issues were picked up with the agencies involved via email and/or visits by the academic lead and
strategies for improvements were agreed.
Some student feedback suggested that a minority of GP tutors hadn’t fully understood their level and were expecting
them to take a medical history from the patient they interviewed. We have corresponded individually with GPs where
necessary and emphasized what students are/are not able to do further in our recruitment and guideline literature for the
coming year. Where student feedback suggested that the quality of GP placements in terms of teaching or organisation
was sub-standard contact with the providers has been made when necessary, and it has been decided that allocations to
those practices will be reduced until such time that quality has been re-established.
A few students reported difficulty in finding placement details and guidance on Moodle. We are hopeful that the central
changes to Moodle design for the new year will solve this.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
74
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Cardiometabolic Patient Pathway
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Mr Moloy Dey
Number Enrolled on Module
325
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
All students passed the final assessment which was an essay discussing a patient which they had seen during their time
in the module with a literature review. There was good participation of all students with regards to the group
presentations which was a new intervention in this year’s diet of the CMPP and was well received by the students. A
prize was given to the best essay.
The quality of teaching, patient interaction and small group teaching were of excellent quality as reported by the students
in the opinio poll. There was improvement in organization of the module as a whole. A full time administrator has been
appointed.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Some of the rooms required the tutors to have their own laptops which did delay starting the tutorials on time. Multiple
different tutors with differing styles also had effect on the variability of the teaching and inhibited the mentoring approach
of a single tutor for all sessions. Also makeshift non cardiology tutors were also recruited at last minute tutor
replacements.
Action: All rooms booked have adequate AV facilities for 2013/14 Edition. We are also planning to purchase laptops.
A dedicated teaching fellow at The Heart will be responsible for making sure a fixed number of tutors are allocated for the
groups. Tutors will be given responsibility to ensure that their sessions are attended or make arrangements for cover.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
•
•
•
•
Tutors not aware of objectives
Different tutors every week
Essays not aligned with objectives
Structure of presentations and essays
First two points have been tackled as listed above
A more robust marking scheme and objective list will be drafted to attempt to resolve this issue.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
75
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Cancer Patient Project
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Dr Ursula McGovern
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
71%
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Overall, good quality of work with a number of students being awarded “A” Grades for exceptional pieces of work. 6
students nominated for the Evelyn Boesen Prize.
Teaching methods (introductory lectures and tutorials) similar to previous years with good feedback.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Feedback from students suggests some of the lectures in the IOM were too long. They will therefore be modified for the
academic year 2013/14 and lectures kept to a minimum of introduction to the module +/- palliative care.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Organisational issues identifying suitable patients have been flagged by students. However, this has improved year on
year with small groups of students being allocated to individual clinics to ensure it is easier to match each student to an
appropriate patient. It must be recognised that identifying 360+ suitable cancer patients may take some time and all
student were successfully paired with patients with the help of their tutors and course organisers.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
We have received the student feedback from the previous year. The Cancer Patient Project scores highly in giving
students an insight into the patient experience. It is of some concern to oncologists that the Project only has a modest
effect in stimulating interest in oncology. The inclusion of oncology in NC5 teaching will give students more exposure to
the medical aspects of oncology and, we hope this will stimulate their interest.
Some of our colleagues are declining to take part in the Project and this prevents us from keeping the tutorial groups
small. We have had a departmental meeting on this subject. We await the response.
76
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Professional Practice and Synthesis
Year
MBBS Years 1, 2, 4, 5, 6
Module Organiser
Dr Lorraine Noble (overall lead) and Dr Jeremy Nathan (Years 1 and 2)
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average mark gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Teaching methods include formal lectures, seminar work, small group practice with simulated patients and video review,
and completion of online e-learning. This is a core subject in the curriculum which is taught to all medical students
throughout the course, sometimes integrated with other subjects and sometimes ‘stand-alone’. Teaching methods are
appropriate and determined by the stage of the course and fit within the overall curriculum.
There has been a reduction in the number of small group sessions of practical work due to central cutting of costs for
vertical module tutors, which has resulted in the reduction of one module during Year 4 and one part of the clinical
introductory course in Year 4.
There has been a change in the system for registering student attendance in Year 4, with students holding their own
attendance cards, and attendance at the small group work with simulated patients has been lower than previous years.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Seminar work including streaming video clips from Moodle in last year’s Year 4 clinical introductory course was difficult
due to the audiovisual set-up being different on the three sites (Bloomsbury, Archway and Royal Free), which included
whether or not there were computers in the teaching rooms, ability to access Moodle using tutor login details, and whether
the system was enabled to stream video and sound. This seminar session has been dropped from the course.
The format of information about the course was changed on the Vertical Modules Moodle webpages compared to
previous years and was found to be difficult to access, in particular as Clinical Communication Skills was placed under
new a sub-heading of Synthesis and Professional Practice. The format of the webpages is being addressed by central
Vertical Modules leadership and it has been requested that Clinical Communication Skills is positioned in a similar ‘layer’
on the webpage to other vertical module subjects, e.g. Clinical Skills.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
No.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall departmental report)
No.
77
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Ethics and Law
Year
MBBS Years 1 - 6
Module Organiser
Dr Jayne Kavanagh
Number Enrolled on Module
N/A
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Significant changes to sessions this year included:
Years 1 & 2
The Duty of Care small group work was dropped due to the transition to the new curriculum.
The Confidentiality and the Consent lecture were moved to horizontal time and delivered between 1 and 5 weeks before
the related small group work in VM time.
Two new lectures on Humanitarian Ethics and Organ Donation were delivered
VM tutors requested the reinstatement of E&L lectures in VM time, immediately before the small group work and this has
been accommodated for 2013/14.
The Duty of Care small group work has also been reinstated.
Some VM tutors were using previous year’s lesson plans because paper versions were not provided this year. Next year I
will provide an Ethics And Law tutor pack at the start of each term and emphasise the importance of using this for all
sessions during tutor training sessions and in written correspondence. I will also provide seminar powerpoint slides to
help tutors structure their seminars and convey key take home messages and learning outcomes.
Year 4
The End of life session was dropped from Year 4 and will be reinstated in Year 5 in 2013.14. The Palliative Care team
have taken over the lead for this session. All relevant resources have been shared with them.
An interactive session on raising concerns was introduced.
Tutors were provided with structured lesson plans and powerpoint slides for seminars.
Tutors were concerned that students would not use the practical model for dealing with challenging situations they have
been taught outside the classroom.
I am negotiating the inclusion of a question on the challenging situations students have come across during Year 4 in
their portfolios which will require students to use the practical model they have been taught in their answers.
Year 5
More Ethics and Law sessions in Year 5 were integrated with clinical teaching and delivered by clinicians from the
relevant specialties with an interest and expertise in ethics and law.
A new session on Female Genital Mutilation was delivered in Women’s Health.
There were some problems recruiting enough expert clinicians for the Child Health sessions. I began recruiting tutors for
next year early and intend to run a rolling programme of training for them with supported facilitation and early peer review.
Tutors reported many questions from students about child protection and sexual health in both the child health sessions
and the women’s health sessions on abortion and contraception.
A new session on Young People and Sexual Health has been included next year.
Significant changes to assessment this year included:
MEQs were dropped in Years 1 & 2 and formative OSCEs were introduced.
An integrated clinical and Ethics And Law OSCE station was introduced in Year 5. There were no problems with the
changes in assessments.
The quality of student work both in terms of engagement in sessions and performance in assessments remains good.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Many students reported difficulties finding Ethics And Law material on Moodle as it was ‘buried’ in the Synthesis and
Professional Practice site in VM. I have requested an Ethics and Law Moodle site.
78
Vertical Modules
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students remain happy with the clear and practically useful presentation of the law and professional guidance throughout
the MBBS.
Most students seemed to genuinely enjoy and appreciate the Ethics And Law seminars in Years 1 and 2. However, some
were disappointed by the lack of ethical debate in their groups.
I have requested time in VM tutor training to address this and will write a guide on how to facilitate debate for the VM
tutors.
Many Year 4 students said the Raising Concerns session should have been run earlier in the year. This session has been
moved to an earlier slot in 2013/14.
Year 5 students appreciated the integrated Ethics And Law and clinical sessions with a focus on how to deal with
practically as well as ethically challenging situations and asked for more integrated sessions.
All Year 5 Ethics And Law sessions will be integrated next year.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned (where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall Programme Organiser Report/Department report).
Non identified
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
79
Vertical Modules
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Number Enrolled on Module
MBPhD Programme
2013-2014
Prof Gordon Stewart
41
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The students on this programme are taught by their PhD supervisors and departments (when in the PhD) and by the
standard methods of MBBS clinical teaching (when in clinical). The teaching methods are assessed elsewhere,
specifically by MBBS committees.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
General lack of space and teachers caused by over-recruitment of medical students in the university. Applies to all MBBS
students. The university and hospitals cannot effectively cope with 380 medical students per year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Issues of Final Clinical Year placements within MBBS addressed by students and Dr Peter Raven (Faculty Tutor), highly
successfully.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A: This course does not have dedicated external examiners. The clinical (MBBS) uses MBBS externals, covered
elsewhere; the PhDs are examined by individual external examiners.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A: There is no real 'chair of teaching committee' for this course. Teaching governed by MBBS and by departmental
PhD regulations.
80
Vertical Modules
Student Presidents Reports
MONITORING REPORT
2012/13
UCL Medical School
University College London
81
Student Presidents Reports
Senior
RUMS Senior Student President 2012-13
Years
MBBS Year 3 - 5
Completed by
Gareth Chan
A. Course summary (Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc)
The presence of online recording of lectures and the continued improvement of Moodle have been accepted warmly and
complement the range of traditional methods. However this has proven to be a double edged sword; with the more
pertinent items being lost in the wide range of material available.
There have been queries raised to the Students' Union regarding "Fitness to Practice" issues regarding the use of social
media and behaviour outside of direct medical school activities. Further guidance has been issued by the medical school.
The SU will be working in conjunction with our BMA reps to draft further guidance for our clubs and societies.
B. Any Learning Resources Problems which have Affected the Provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities) and Action Taken or Planned
The move of the cruciform library to the science library in the immediate period before year 4 and 5 exams with altered
opening hours was met with some criticism by students. But liaising between library staff and the Education VPs were
able to agree on amended opening and access hours.
There were issues regarding the lack of accommodation at certain DGHs that were raised by some students. This was
addressed by the course administrators and managers on receipt of further details. There were also issues of the misuse
of DGH accommodation by some students.
The lack of lectures in NC4 to cover the key therapeutic and clinical aspects of the course was a major issue in this
transitional year. But something the reps have been assured will be looked resolved.
There was a feeling that TY5 and NC4 didn't receive the full teaching experience in infectious diseases and neurology
given the transitional nature of 2012/13. This will not be an issue for 2013/14.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and Action Taken or Planned
Non identified
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable)
The Education VPs and reps have liaised with the school via the SSCCs regarding the future of lectures in Year 4 and
this has been resolved.
It is envisaged that with the closure of large parts of the cruciform building for the remainder of 2013 will have significant
knock on effects for Bloomsbury based students. But hopefully with the opening of the new hub in 2014 medical students
will fully utilise this facility.
82
Student Presidents Reports
Junior
Junior Vice President for Education 2012-13
Years
MBBS Years 1 & 2
Completed by
Ravi Mistry
A. Course summary (Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc)
Overall, students are pleased with the delivery of the course for years 1&2. Lectures are well received, as are dissection
sessions in the anatomy laboratory and histology CAL teaching. Small-group VM teaching is well received too, with many
students appreciating the regular, high-frequency contact with a tutor they can develop a rapport with. PALS teaching is
also popular.
There is a strong desire within both years for an increase in small group teaching for the horizontal modules, similar to the
C&B tutorials run in year one.
There is potential scope for Y2 teaching to finish before Easter – something that would be welcomed by all students (see
section C below).
B. Any Learning Resources Problems which have Affected the Provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities) and Action Taken or Planned

Lecturecast continues to be treasured by students, allowing for greater flexibility and precision in learning.
Students would appreciate notice in advance via email or next the lecture slides/course material on Moodle if a
lecture is not being recorded.

Computer cluster access is difficult and this is anticipated to escalate for most of the next year with the Cruciform
Hub developments leading the Cruciform Cluster to be inaccessible. There is frustration amongst medical
students that such a large cluster is booked for small classes and then medical students are refused entry to for
quiet study, even at the opposite end of the room.

Students would like lecturers to take advantage of the TurningPoint (PRS) system to increase student-lecturer
interactivity.

LAPT continues to be highly valued by Y1&2 students to evaluate elements of Y1&2 knowledge and are keen to
see this provision continue either as-is or as a Moodle equivalent.

Students request that clearer information about summative assessments is given either verbally or in writing. This
year students were not told of the grouping of SBA questions per paper and would appreciate notice of this
advance, allowing for more effective in the run-up to the exams. It is hoped this is rectified from next year
onwards.

The VM moodle page is currently too complex with content separated out to each individual strand, making it hard
to access material quickly in a chronological order. This will hopefully change soon with a TEDI in place, involving
a VM lead and 3 students, to help simplify the interface for students.

Students request cluster rooms be booked for them during SPL sessions allowing them to be guaranteed access
to computers to complete their work in the allotted time on the timetable as most students don’t bring laptops in
with them.
83
Student Presidents Reports
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and Action Taken or Planned

Students highly value the ability to ‘replay’ lectures and this has led to much discussion across all the Y1&2
SSCCs to introduce an ‘audio only’ option for lecturers who do not wish their lectures to be visually recorded for
personal reasons or for intellectual property reasons (either of their own material, or that of others).
Action Taken/Planned: Students have been reassured in the SSCC that such an option will exist from the next
academic year onwards and the student representatives hope this feature is highlighted to lecturers and taken up
to increase provision of recorded lectures.

The issue of the questions present in formative assessments (both February and end-of-unit Moodle quizzes)
have been raised in Y1&2 TSC and SSCC meetings. Students are aware that the Medical School has put effort in
to move to more probing and ‘true’ SBAs as opposed to ‘best of five’ or True/False style questions for summative
assessments. Students expressed a wish for formative assessments to reflect this change to provide a better
reflection of the challenge and depth of questions they will face in summer.
Action Taken/Planned: Students have been told at TSCs and SSCCs that leads in course are aware of this and
are working to rectify this issue as soon as possible.

SEQs indicate some frustration amongst second year students given the how sparse their timetable in the final
week of N&B, ESR, RGD – resulting in calls to move those lectures into earlier weeks, so as to allow Cancer
Biology to finish before Easter, allowing for an uninterrupted revision period from Easter until the exams.

There is a great deal of variability between the personal tutors, with many students reporting tutors being very
unfamiliar with the general details about Y1&2 course structure and the nature of assessments. This, alongside a
lack of rapport given the infrequent meetings with personal tutors lead many students to be far more comfortable
in speaking to their VM tutors regarding academic/pastoral welfare.
Action Taken/Planned: Discussion has taken place in SSCCs asking for more training for personal tutors.

The formative OSCEs were incredibly well received and are popular with both years. Students in both years
reported to reps that they found the assessment to be a good way to evaluate knowledge and skills that
SBAs/Data papers cannot appropriately reach. The student reps agreed they would like to see this assessment
continue as a formative assessment for both years or for it to carry equal worth as an SSC (mandatory to pass in
order to progress but not necessarily carry weight to the overall pass mark/IBSc classification).

More sample scenarios are needed for formative OSCEs to highlight to students the breadth of styles questions
can take. The one example provided this year was an accurate representation of its respective style, but two
further examples highlighting different topics would better aid students’ preparation and reduce anxiety.

It is noted amongst reps and staff that SEQ response rates leave a lot to be desired. One sentiment echoed back
by students was the fact that they rarely were aware of the changes their responses made.
84
Student Presidents Reports
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable)
It is incredibly positive to see the Medical School take student participation so seriously. Student reps are grateful for all
efforts by staff to engage with students in a meaningful way and taking the time to enter constructive discussions on a
variety of issues.
Details of the MBBS No-Show scheme have been publicised more widely this year, leading to an increase in Y1&2
students notifying the Medical School of teacher no-shows. From the next academic year onwards, Y1&2 reps will be
given basic training on using the A/V console in Cruciform LT1 to reduce the amount of time lost due to technical
disturbances with microphones at the start of lectures.
Several changes are planned for the Y1 timetable alongside the introduction of ‘Integration’ weeks. Y1 reps and myself
wish to thank Dr Dilworth for his extensive consulting with students and look forward to seeing this being delivered next
year.
85
Student Presidents Reports
Senior
Vice-President for Education 2013-14
Years
MBBS Years 4-6
Completed by
Katherine Belessiotis
A. Course summary (i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc)



It is felt that students are satisfied with the pace of the course. Students feel that learning objectives for clinical
placements are not always made clear. In particular, they are given a list of conditions to know about but the depth of
knowledge required is not explained. Students would appreciate more guidance on course content to help navigate
and make the most of the many and diverse clinical placements which the medical school organizes for them.
In all three clinical years, it is felt that there is a good balance between lectures and clinical teaching. However, thus
far there have been a number of repeat lectures as well as delays and cancellations in the Vertical Module and Core
Teaching Week courses. Unfortunately, some students have had to travel back to campus from DGH placements and
they feel that this is not appropriate as it is a waste of money and time.
Students are always hoping to receive their timetables for the next rotation with a few weeks’ notice. This helps with
accommodation and travel arrangements, and also allows students to plan their time accordingly, as many students
engage in extracurricular activities.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities




The new student Hub at the Royal Free Hospital has been very well received by the students, they are very thankful
for this new facility.
Students felt that although the Hub at the Whittington site is still under renovation, the atmosphere and facilities
weren’t as welcoming as those on other sites. The Medical School staff have assured the space will be more
accessible soon.
Not all lectures, particularly in some of the Core Teaching Weeks in Years 4 & 5, are made available on Lecturecast.
This has been fed-back to the Pathological Sciences Lead.
The provision of internet access at DGH sites has improved. Students are still inquiring into a more permanent
solution than that provided at QEII/Lister sites where the facilities are limited. Year 6 students are writing a letter to
the relevant site leads.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned




Generally, the issues with Year 4 from 2012/2013 have been resolved, and the students are feeling comfortable in
their first rotation. There is some degree of discrepancy in terms of the quality of teaching in the Neurology placement
between the Royal Free Hospital and Queen Square. The leads are aware and are meeting to discuss how to rectify
this.
Year 5 students feel that there has been a lot of paperwork and feedback introduced this year. They have generally
found that teachers are either reluctant to complete the necessary forms, or that it detracts from the experience and
learning from the session.
All Years would greatly benefit from an identical template for timetabling, as there are a number of different timetables
in complex locations on Moodle, that cause a lot of confusion. The administrative team is looking into using a
common format for all placements.
The students still find the new Moodle site difficult to navigate and are going to make a request to the Provost to
simplify and improve the site.
86
Student Presidents Reports
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)


The Years 4, 5 & 6 Staff & Student Consultative Committee met three times throughout the year. Student
representatives appreciate this commitment from the medical school and feel that their feedback is listened to and
acted upon.
Numerous issues were addressed throughout the year and most were resolved, which was highly appreciated. The
students are always thankful to the staff for their input, effort, and assistance. The newest addition to the Moodle VLE,
‘You said, we listened’ site, will be a space where students can feed back directly to the Medical School, and will
allow them to browse how previous issues have been resolved.
87