Student Consultation
Consultation with students should be undertaken for all new programmes and major changes to programmes. Please ensure that you allow enough time to carry out your student consultation. We advise that you start this process early on in developing your proposal in order to accommodate student feedback.
When presenting proposals to students, please consider the likely effect of any changes on the student experience and specifically include this for students to comment and feedback on.
Title of new programme or programmes which are undergoing a major change / Intercalated BSc in Genomic MedicineMethod of Student consultation
Please detail all methods used and state why these methods were chosen. / Through the consultation process, a series of different techniques have been used to assess student opinion with respect to the attractiveness of the course, but also the content, material and mode of delivery. The first of these was a survey for medical students on intercalation in Bristol (see Supplementary GM_Medic Survey 2013). This survey included questions which were pertinent to understanding whether students wanted to intercalate at all, whether students wanted to study genetics and genomics and also whether there was equal interest in genetics and genomics across those who did and did not intercalate. This was therefore a focus on demand.
Following this, we employed an questionnaire directed at the fourth and first year medical undergraduates which was aimed at collecting opinion with respect to demand for the proposed course. This questionnaire was delivered by staff briefed about the course, but also alongside an overview unit structure document used to inform about the shape and pitch of the course (see Supplementary documents GM_Blackboard material and GM_Questionnaire 2015).
Following this, we employed an open meeting format to both pitch the proposed course and to gauge levels of interest in the programme. This carried with it a brief overview presented to students along with a brief discussion. The overview slides can be seen in SupplementaryGM_Presentation 2016).
Lastly, to cover issues of more detailed content and course design, we have been in touch with representatives of the Galenicals (The University of Bristol Medical Society) who have been provided with details of the proposed course (unit plans, academic case, mapping details and assessments) for more specific consideration and comment during the design process.
Date of Student Consultation
If consultation carried out over a period of time please give the dates. / (i) Original years 1-4 questionnaire – June/July 2013
(ii) Fourth year questionnaire – September 2015
(iii) First year questionnaire – October 2015
(iv) Student pitch and feedback – Second year – January 2016
(v) Galenicals course material consultation – March 2016
Which students were consulted
Please give name of programme and year of study, no actual names should be provided. / (i) Original years 1-4 questionnaire – This survey ran for a period of three weeks and all students (n=1000) in years 1-4 were contacted and asked to participate and a response was obtained from 339. The breakdown of responses over the years contacted followed:
1st year - 73 (22%)
2nd year – 71 (21%)
3rd year – 92 (27%)
4th year- 57 (17%)
Intercalating – 46 (14%)
(ii) Fourth year questionnaire – During the Community Orientated Medical Practice component of the fourth year, a rotation group (~60 students – 45 returns) received the iBSc questionnaire for completion. Given their status (i.e. past the opportunity to apply), these students were asked to comment from a position of retrospective experience.
(iii) First year questionnaire – First year students undertaking Clinical Epidemiology Tutorials. Each tutor group (~10-14 students; in total 88 students returned) introduced the proposed iBSc (following a briefing) to the student groups separately. They were given ~10 mins to complete the questionnaires which were returned and collated. Given their status (i.e. leading up to the opportunity to apply), these students were asked to comment from a position of possible applications in the future.
(iv) Student pitch and feedback – Second year –During a between lecture slot (Neurology sessions at Medical sciences), the whole second year group (i.e. those with the potential to apply for the new iBSc) were briefed about the course and had an opportunity to ask questions and feed back to the course leads. This gave the opportunity to gauge the immediate intake year and potential for interest, content and recruitment.
(v) Galenicals course material consultation –The full academic case documents (including the specific unit plans) reached a total of 16 people from varying years (6 x Y4, 8 x Y3, 1 current intercalator, 1 x Y2). Results from the following comments were amalgamated and summarised by the outgoing president of the Galenicals student medical society.
What questions were asked or what were the topics covered? / As described above, there were a series of consultations which carried with them different purposes. The initial questionnaire and to some extent that following in the first and fourth years were aimed at gauging interest (as mentioned above). Whilst remaining light touch, however, we attempted to broaden our questions to include issues which would also be relevant for the design of the course in the context of the material already delivered by the medical degree. For example:
“Do you feel that genetics and other commercial “health scan” data at the level of the population (and available to the lay population) will have an impact on medical practice in the future?”
“Can you foresee a situation in your clinical career when an education in the type, application and analysis of genetic data might be of assistance?”
In the early stages of the design of this course, these were important questions in that they have helped to shape the niche within which we believe the taught material will sit. To this end, we have been able to realise that the optimal pitch for this course is not necessarily one of pure genetics course, nor one crossing over with other advanced courses offered elsewhere or for graduate students.
This consultation has allowed us to recognised that the iBSc Medical Genomics pitch should be appealing to the contemporary clinician – i.e. equipping a modern doctor with the tools required to assess and understand genetic and genomic data and findings. This provides the stepping-stone to an academic career (or ACF), however could also be viewed as a CV enhancing course that leads to being a modern doctor more generally. This has an impact on content, but also to the title.
Importantly, we did not only pitch the questionnaire material to those who had either finished or started the run up to possible intercalation. We have been able to review the opinions of those who are able to apply for this course in years to come and also those who have either intercalated already or who chose not to the in their second year.
In the pitch and feedback session, we were able to outline the then designed unit structure (see Supplementary documentGM_Blackboard material) and to again gain information about likely demand, but also on the content of the course in informal discussion. We based this session on time with the current second year students as these are the most likely pool of students to apply for this new course.
Lastly, we have circulated the details unit plans course structure and alignment with representatives of the Galenicals. At this stage we did not provide specific questions, however asked for comments, criticisms and suggestions for the specific contents of the course.
What were the queries and concerns raised by your students and how you have responded to them?* / Questionnaires – The first of the two questionnaires employed during the consultation process was a general exercise available to the whole student group assessing the overall level of demand for iBScs including one focused on genetics and genomics. An important observation from this initial consultation was that there was both demand for intercalation and that there was demand also present to undertake a course in genetics and genomics (representing over 10% of those wishing to intercalate). An important additional measure from this initial work was that when considering those who did not intercalate as well as those that did, for genetics and genomics, there was evidence that a substantial proportion of those wishing to do genetics and genomics were those who otherwise did not intercalate (40%). This represents an important and potentially under-resourced group (see GM_Medic Survey 2013).
Further questionnaires from the students in the first and fourth years were able to confirm this likely demand (see Supplementary GM_Questionnaire 2015 feedback), but also to ask specifically about aspects of course content. In the fourth year (retrospective consultation) 36/45(80%) students felt that “outside classroom clinical genetics” there was not enough teaching on genetics and genomics, 39/35(97%) could “foresee a situation in your clinical career when an education in the type, application and analysis of genetic data might be of assistance?” and of the 34 who had or would have considered doing an iBSc, 27 (79%) would have considered Medical Genomics as a focus.
In the first year, there was obviously less valid comment on the content of the existing medical degree re. genetics and genomics (given students had only just started the course), however 75/88(85%) could already “foresee a situation in your clinical career when an education in the type, application and analysis of genetic data might be of assistance?” and of the 67 who are considered doing an iBSc as their undergraduate degree continues, 56 (78%) would consider Medical Genomics as a focus.
Together, this information has confirmed to us the demand for the proposed course (something that is mirrored in the acceptance of 11 students onto the course for 2016/17), but also has allowed us to ensure that that material is not overlapping with the existing medical degree and that the focus on the course is one of clinical application.
An important extension of this is that in the fourth and first year questionnaires, 98% and 97% of students contributing felt that genetics and other commercial "health scan" data at the level of the population (and available to the lay population) will have an impact on medical practice in the future”. This type of integration of genetics data with clinical practice one of the binding characteristics of the proposed degree.
Pitch and feedback – During the pitch and feedback session held with the current second year medical undergraduates, we received queries about the course structure, the nature of the possible projects and the technical requirements for being accepted on the course. Obvious responses to these queries have been to deliver this information and also to make this information clear and accessible at the time of application. Questions directed towards the project/dissertation part of the course concerned the applied nature of the project opportunities and the potential for work to be published. In recognising that there is demand for this level of application within the dissertation projects available from the course, we have made sure to include an active research component within the research projects which allows for novel research and the opportunity to publish if it is appropriate.
Direct review of course material by Galenicals was usefully organised and returned a collection of constructive criticism and positive feedback (see supplementary document GM_Galenicals student feedback). Overall it was felt that this was an appealing iBSc, that the course sounded interesting and had a good, broad, mix of content and that the structure was “well thought through”. Specific responses to the feedback given can be found in the supplementary document, but the focus positive comments from this feedback included:
- Really like the focus onclinical application of Genomics as well as the importance of medical research and keeping up to date—vital for everyday practice as a doctor. Students are often frustrated that intercalation programmes are less clinically applicable than they anticipate so combining the two would be hugelysuccessful—appealing to a wider audience and providing an opportunity for people to consider an academic career whilst not being too overwhelming!
- Great to have the opportunity to get involved in a research project, particularly as it allows students to pursue specific aspects of the course that interest them. I also imagine many students may hope that this may result in the possibility of a publication with their research team.
- Medical students will be able to build on their learning pathway to help in future years at university and as a doctor: e.g. covering topics such as 'legal and ethical implications (of genomic information)' etc. as seen in the Personal Genomics and Population Lab unit; or learning about genomic knowledge in regards to common diseases/areas such as cardiovascular health, allergies, asthma (etc.) in the Genomic Medicine unit.
- Many of the modules appear to have limited numbers of contact hours per week with a heavy amount of independent learning. Will students be supported well enough throughout the year?Will they have a personal tutor within the field of genomics that they could discuss things with given the limited formal teaching?Or perhaps online resources/tutorials as the course develops to support their learning?
The Feedback also notes the value in small groups—a point that we will try to maintain as much as possible throughout the delivery of this degree:
- Anticipated intake of at least 11, is there a‘capacity’ for the course? Keeping the group small to ensure effective group work, interactive teaching and discussion is possible seems important whilst also maximising opportunity for people to take up the intercalation if they wish.
How have you fed back changes/developments to the students involved? / We will feed back results of the consultation process primarily into the course design. Given that this is the first year of this course and that recruitment for the first cohort has occurred, we have been focusing on the migration of suggestions and feedback directly into the course material. We propose to have another period of reflection and consultation going into year two of the course in order to close the loop on a more complete “you said, we did” feedback system.
What we have recognised (as mentioned above) is the emphasis on this course not being one focused on molecular genetics alone. The unique selling point of this course is its applied nature and this has been noted and favourably accepted by the students contributing to the consultation process. Therefore, whilst we have had limited time to review existing material in a year-on-year fashion, we have brought this into the consideration of the course layout.
Where we have had specific feedback, we have let the students know how their contributions have fed into the course design directly. This will be particularly relevant for the first year students who helped with their questionnaire returns, in that this feedback will directly shape the course that they may be able to apply for.
* If you have any negative feedback from your student consultation, please respond directly to the questions and concerns raised and demonstrate how you have either accommodated students’ concerns or explain why it would not be possible to achieve what was requested.
Template completed by: / Dr N J Timpson Dr O S DavisPosition: / Programme Co-Leads, Readers in Genetic Epidemiology and Statistical Genetics
Date: / 12th April 2016
1