1. Lecture Effectiveness by Lecturers from Biomedical Science Department, FSKB UKM Supervisor: Puan Rifina Arlin binti Drs. Haji Zainal Arifin PM Dr Ahmad Rohi bin Ghazali GROUP 6 BIOMEDICAL SCIENCE

3. INTRODUCTION The study is mainly conducted to provide an useful framework in improving lecture delivery effectiveness among 1 st year Biomedical Science lecturers in FSKB, UKM. Since most of the studies on lecture delivery effectiveness use only one source of information that can create bias and unreliability, it has initiated us to conduct this study using multiple sources.

4. The research is done based on the background reference to two research articles: a) The Colleague Developmental Program: a multidisciplinary program of peer observation partnerships (Maree et al, 2009) b) Using the 360 o multisource feedback model to evaluate teaching and professionalism (Ronald, 2009) These two articles are referred to obtain information regarding the multisource of lecturing evaluation.

5. Is the lecture given by lecturers from Biomedical Science Department, FSKB UKM effective?

6. Lecture given by lecturers from Biomedical Science Department, FSKB UKM is effective.

7. To evaluate the lecture delivery effectiveness given by 1 st year Biomedical Science Department, FSKB UKM lecturers.

8. i)To determine students’ understanding level. ii)To compare the effectiveness of various teaching methods. iii)To determine the association between lecturers self-preparation with students’ understanding. iv)To determine the association between the effectiveness of lectures and students’ academic performance.

9. Research Location: UKMKL Study Design: Cross Sectional Study Target Pop: All lecturers in UKMKKL Study Pop: 1 st year to 3 rd year biomedical student and all the 1 st year biomedical lecturers

10. Sample Sizes : Student Sample Size = 160 Lecturer Sample Size = 7

11. Demographic Data :

15. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1 To Determine Students’ Understanding Level

16. Questionnaires Used I am able to summarize the main points after every lecture. Lecturers using terms and explanation that I am able to understand. I am able to understand every lecture given by the lecturers.

17. Test Used Descriptive Statistic

18. Descriptive Statistic:

19. Specific objective 1 52.4% of the students have good understanding level after every lecture delivered.

20. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2 To Determine The Effectiveness of Various Teaching Methods

21. Questionnaires Used By giving assignment can help me understand well the certain topic studied. By doing case study can help me understand well the certain topic studied. By having an individual/group presentation can help me understand well the certain topic studied. By accessing E-SPIN learning can help me understand well the certain topic studied. By conducting a tutorial can help me understand well the certain topic studied. By having Problems Base Learning can help me understand well the certain topic studied.

22. Test Used 1. Kruskal Wallis 2. Mann Whitney Test

23. Normality Testing Kolmogorov-Smirnov Sig. Value<0.0005** Kruskal-Wallis Sig. Value<0.0005** Highly significant difference between the 6 groups of teaching methods. PROCEED to Mann-Whitney test, to know where the significance lies. KRUSKAL-WALLIS Proceed to Kruskal-Wallis since data is not normally distributed.

24. Assignment Case study Individual/ group presentatio n e-SPINTutorial Problem base learning Assignment-0.6770.223<0.0005**0.1980.801 Case study0.677-0.079<0.0005**0.0850.832 Individual/ group presentation 0.2230.079-<0.0005**0.8580.102 e-SPIN<0.0005** - Tutorial0.1980.0850.858<0.0005**-0.109 Problem base learning 0.8010.8320.102<0.0005**0.109- Mann Whitney Test

25. Teaching MethodsMedianEffective Way of Teachings Assignment22 Tutorial18 Case Study17 PBL14 Individual / Group presentation 13 e-SPIN2 Median value for each teaching methods,

26.  Prepares students to seek out appropriate learning resources  enable students to work in groups and improve their interactive and leadership skills Written assignments help in organization of knowledge, assimilation of facts and better preparation of examinations. It emphasizes on individual pupil work and the method that helps both teaching and learning processes (Kochhar, 2000, p.358) Assignments : Assignments are the most effective teaching method because:

27. e-SPIN : e-SPIN is the least effective teaching method because : Unmotivated learners or those with poor study habits may fall behind. Lecturers may not always be available on demand.

28. Specific objective 2  Assignments are the most effective teaching method while e-SPIN is the least effective teaching method.

29. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3 To determine the association between lecturers’ self-preparation and lecture delivery effectiveness

30. Questionnaires Used Lecture notes or related informations are given by lecturers before every lecture. Lecturers deliver lectures based on “Student Guide Book''. Lecturers mentioned his/her objective and simple outline of the topic before delivering the whole topic. Lecturers uses flow charts and diagrams for teaching purposes. Lecturers update his/her notes with the latest information frequently. Lecturers discuss the recent development and researches with students during the lecture. Lecturers provide additional information (articles, journal, website address) related to the topic.

31. Test Used Spearman Correlation

32. Kolmogorov-Smirnov Sig. Value Lecturers’ self - preparation <0.0005** Students’ Understanding<0.0005** Normality Testing Spearman Correlation Sig. Value (2-tailed)r Value <0.0005**0.263** Spearman correlation Proceed to Spearman Correlation since data is not normally distributed.

33. Specific objective 3 Lecturer’s self preparation have a weak correlation with lecturers delivery effectiveness

34. Cox and Rogers (2005) described a well- prepared lecture as an interactive experience that actively engages students in the process of learning and can support diverse student learning. When the objective is to communicate basic facts, introduce intitial concepts or convey passion about a topic, a well prepared lecture is very useful (Cox & Rogers, 2005, Gleitman, 2006) Self-preparation of teachers in US tends to increase personal teaching efficacy (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1990; Wenner, 2001)

35. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 4 To determine the association between effectiveness of lecture and students’ academic performance during 1 st year 1 st semester

36. Test Used Spearman Correlation

37. Kolmogorov-Smirnov Sig. Value Effectiveness of lectures<0.0005** GPA<0.0005** Normality Testing Spearman Correlation Sig. Value (2-tailed)r Value 0.8190.018 Spearman correlation Proceed to Spearman correlation since data is not normally distributed.

38. Specific objective 4 Effectiveness of lecture delivery does not influence students’ academic performance during first year first sem study.

39. This might be due to students not depending solely on the lecturer’s lecture delivery and lecture notes. Students may find other sources to perform academically besides lecture notes only, which is also known as active learning. Active learning refers to situations where students are involved in the educational process instead of passively listening to lectures (Hermanson, 1994)

40. Students not paying full attention during lecture or being absent for a particular lecture. Cox (1994) suggests that, ideally lectures are only there to lay foundations, show the way, and ease the passage, as the student works through the subject.

41. General conclusion Lecture delivery given by 1 st year Biomedical Science Department, FSKB UKM lecturers is effective but there is no correlation between the effectiveness of lectures and students’ academic performance.

42. Reference Naoto I. 2000. A cross-sectional study on constipation by questionnaire to students in Meiji University of Oriental Medicine. Journal of Meiji University Of Oriental Medicine 27(2): 47-53. Guimaraes E.V. 2001. Dietary fiber intake, stool frequency and colonic transit time in chronic functional constipation in children. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 34(9): 1147-1153. Williams J.. 2008. A study to determine actual consumption, awareness of health benefits and factors influencing fruit and vegetable consumption in first-year undergraduate students. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics 13(5): 363-371.

43. Morais M.B. 1999. Measurement of low dietary fiber intake as a risk factor for chronic constipation in children. Journal of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition 29(2): 132-135. M. Galisteo. 2009. Effects of dietary fibers on disturbances clustered in the metabolic syndrome. The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry 19(2): 71-84. Warren TK. 2007. Increased prevalence of constipation in pre- school children is attributable to under-consumption of plant foods: A community-based study. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health 44(4): 170-175. Garrigues V. 1991. Prevalence of constipation: Agreement among several criteria and evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of qualifying symptoms and self-reported definition in a population-based survey in Spain. American Journal of Epidemiology 159(5): 520-526.

44. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We want to thank to all biostatistics lecturers especially Puan Rifina Arlin binti Drs. Haji Zainal Arifin & PM Dr Ahmad Rohi bin Ghazali for being our supervisor. We also would like to express our appreciation to all Biomedical Science students first, second and third years that had participated in answering questionnaires to assist our study.

45. THANK YOU