Syllabus Evaluation and Reflection

After designing a syllabus for adult learners in a medical assisting program focused on situation cognition and the learning environment, I asked for two experts in the field to review and evaluate my syllabus.  Both evaluators received a copy of my syllabus and the rationale.  I asked each evaluator to provide me with the strengths, weaknesses, areas to improve, and overall comments related to the functionality of my syllabus. 

 The first evaluator has worked in education for twelve years and as a dean of health science programs for the past eight years.  My first evaluator has had a wealth of experience reviewing syllabi in adult programs from disciplines including business, human resources, medical assisting, nursing, and information technology.  I looked to her expertise on the overall design and flow of my syllabus. 

My second evaluator is an expert in the medical assisting field and, in fact, holds a CMA (certified medical assistant) license from the AAMA.  She also has years of teaching clinical and externship students as well as degrees in medical assisting and health information management.  I relied on the expertise from my second evaluator for the overall functionality of the program and syllabus design as well as the content related to the field of medical assisting through the AAMA. 

Please find the first evaluation below:

Syllabus Evaluation: Clinical Procedures MED2200 (Perquisite for Externship)

Evaluator 1: National Dean, ITT Technical Institute, Memphis, TN

Qualifications: Oversight of academic programs, instructors, regulatory compliance and educational activities of ITT Memphis campus Medical, Business, and Information Technology programs

Ms. Shafer,

The attached course syllabus is very detailed and contains a well formed outline for a course for medical assisting students.  As per the rationale you provided, I understand the intent of the course is to provide the student “hands on” experience in a classroom setting prior to going off site to perform a clinical procedure type externship.  Please find the following strengths and weaknesses listed below per your request:

Strengths

·         The course appears to provide a solution to a current need or problem

·         The syllabus contains a weekly outline and schedule of events/topics to cover

·         Inclusion of the breakdown of lab, lecture, and contact hours which aids in compliance

·         Detailed course objectives

·         Listing student strategies in order to be successful is positive setting up expectations from the beginning

Weaknesses

·         The weekly schedule for a twelve week program should be broken into twelve weeks rather than combing the material to be covered in increments of two. 

·         The grading scale does not show (+) or (-) yet the score for the core competency shows that it must be 77% or higher, which is described as a (c+) or better.  This should be revised.

·         Include more articles, websites, or additional reading for students to research outside of class.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  Good luck on your project.

Best Regards,

National Dean, ITT Tech

After reviewing the syllabus evaluation from the first evaluator, I found the information to be very informative.  The first evaluator was highly concerned that my program syllabus was addressing an actual need and was very pleased to find out that the syllabus is based on a “hands on” course focused on increasing knowledge and skills of medical assistants prior to their externship hours.  The first evaluator also appreciated the detail included in the syllabus in the weekly outline, schedule of events, breakdown of lab/lecture hours, and detailed course objectives.  I appreciated that my first evaluator could immediately see how this syllabus follows the theories behind situated cognition and learning physical environments.  As observed by Malcolm Knowles (1970), adults are more motivated to learn when they see the immediate application of knowledge and prefer to participate in problem-centered learning activities. The theory of situated learning suggests that knowledge and skills related to adult roles and responsibilities can be learned most efficiently within the actual context where they are used (MacKercher 2004).  The simulation models, human volunteers, role play, class lab equipment/tools, and arrangement of the classroom to resemble a ‘real-life’ clinical office were specifically noticed by both evaluators. 

The first evaluator had great suggestions that I not only agree with, but would implement in my syllabus design.  First, she suggested that I breakdown the course in a weekly format rather than combining two weeks at a time because the class meets on a weekly basis.  This adjustment makes since to me for not only the students, but the instructor of the course as well.  The second suggestion made involved the discrepancy in the course grading scale versus the scale used in the competencies section.  This is an error on my part that I am happy this educator caught.  I would make the change suggested here to help the grading scale be consistent in the classroom as well as the competency aspect.  Finally, the first evaluator suggested that I include more outside resources for students to research outside of class including additional articles, reference books, and websites.  I agree with this suggestion as well.  I would look to experts in the field to provide me with this information as I am not a certified medical assistant, nor do I currently work in the health sciences field.  However, the suggestion is a good one and I agree.  Overall, I would make each adjustment suggested by my first evaluator because I believe each change adds clarity for the instructor as well as the students.

The second syllabus evaluation can be found below:

Syllabus Evaluation Clinical Procedures – MED2200 Evaluator: AiInstructor of Health Sciences, Harrison College Qualifications: Instructor in Medical Assisting program for 7 years.  Associates in Medical Assisting, Eton Technical Institute.  Bachelors degree in Health Information Management, IUPUC,  CMA, AAMA
Syllabus details	Positive Areas	Areas for Improvement
Intro	Great detail on room, instructor contact information, meeting times	Include tutoring hours for instructor outside of class time
Prerequisites	Including prerequisites	Students in a course like this would need advanced A&P and Medical Terminology in addition to other prerequisites
Course Objectives	Great detail and legitimate outline including detail under each objective
Course Competencies	Overall inclusion of competencies	Add more description surrounding the competencies to include the section they will be completing for AAMA, ie: 107A
Course information		Include computer requirements/software needed to view websites and videos mentioned
Weekly lesson topics	Sequencing works and order good for students to build upon skills as knowledge and skill level increases	Some weeks have more information than others which might cause instructor to struggle to get through content in the timeline suggested

My second syllabus evaluator used a unique format to review my syllabus.  Because of this format, I will go through the feedback based on each syllabus detail in the table rather than by going through strengths first and then weaknesses.  Overall, I found that the second evaluator provided me with outstanding feedback.

In the introduction of the syllabus, the second evaluator noted that she was impressed that I included details like the room number, instructor contact information, and meeting times.  As a student myself, I always appreciate when an instructor adds this information.  Sometimes the meeting times and place are not what the student expected.  Also, having the instructor’s contact information is great for when the student needs to contact the instructor outside of class.  The evaluator suggested that I also add tutoring hours to the syllabus.  Although I think this is a good suggestion, not all instructors have set tutoring hours, so I think this suggestion can be included as well as additional information on open labs, etc. if such a “time” exists.  I don’t think this suggestion will be relevant at all times and so I would not necessary make this adjustment. 

The next section reviewed was the prerequisite section.  The second evaluator thought that it was great that I included the perquisites just in case the student may not be on track or happen to be put in a course by accident.  However, she also suggested that I add additional courses like advanced anatomy and physiology and medical terminology.  In this instance, I would certainly follow the expert’s advice as she is very familiar with the medical assisting program and what would be required in a course like MED2200. 

In the third section, my second evaluator analyzed the core competencies and concluded that my syllabus should include the specific competency numbers associated with the course competency expectations as documented by the AAMA accrediting standards.  I agree with this suggestion as well.  I know that each competency has a corresponding number through the AAMA and this adjustment would make it simple to add, delete, change or prove which competencies the students are meeting when asked by the accrediting body. 

In looking at the course information, my second evaluator made a good point that I did not include computer and software requirements.  In my syllabus, I added that outside internet research would be required as well as the ability to observe videos and other media; however, I did not include the specific requirements.  This change would assist students in preparation a great deal, which helps the instructor in the long run as well.

In the final section, my second evaluator analyzed the weekly lesson topic breakdown.  I was elated that she agreed with my sequence of information and my attempt to create building blocks of information students can use to increase knowledge and skills over the life of the class. This section was particularly complicated for me as a novice in the medical field.  However, I do agree with the suggestion here that I should revise the information taught to fit more efficiently in the weeks of the course so that subjects or lesions that need more time, have more time and vice versa.  This is something that was even harder to predict not having taught such a course and having very little knowledge of how long each of these lessons require for competence. 

In conclusion, I found both evaluations to have a great impact on my perspective of my syllabus design.  I enjoyed seeing the concept of situated cognition and the physical environment analyzed through another educator’s eyes.  This was even more exciting when my syllabus was confirmed by another educator to exhibit the application of the theory.  I learned that it is very important to have input from someone with an educational background as well as expertise in the field.  My second evaluator really helped to tighten up the project with her suggestions based on years of clinical teaching expertise as well as knowledge of the accreditation needs. 

References

MacKeracher, D. (2004). Making sense of adult learning. (2^nd ed.). Toronto, Canada. University of Toronto Press.