Student Engagement in Program Evaluation: Redesigning the Premedical Curriculum Through Instructor–Learner Co-Creation

• Published in: Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
• Main Authors: Panrawee Sertsuwankul, Sethapong Lertsakulbunlue, Mathirut Mungthin, Anupong Kantiwong
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SAGE Publishing 2025-09-01
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205251374898

Background Engaging students in curriculum development provides valuable insights and promotes alignment with their learning needs. Premedical curricula often overemphasize basic sciences, highlighting the need to incorporate social sciences and earlier patient exposure. This study involved students as key stakeholders in redesigning and evaluating the curriculum's clinical relevance. Methods A two-phase mixed-methods study was conducted, guided by the context, input, process, product (CIPP) evaluation model. Phase one (context and input) utilized a 5-point Likert-scale questionnaire to assess perceptions of 380 students on premedical learning and its relevance to the preclinical curriculum, alongside open-ended suggestions. Student group activities identified key curriculum issues, informing revisions made in collaboration with the curriculum committee and student representatives, aligned with national medical competency standards. In phase two (process and product), 90 third-year students evaluated the revised curriculum using the same questionnaire with student representatives leading the process. Statistical analyses (Cramér's V, Chi-square, and t -tests) and content analysis were employed. Results In the previous curriculum, only 38.48% of students agreed/strongly agreed that premedical subjects aligned with preclinical learning, citing limited clinical relevance and disconnected content (n = 21). A student-led review, in collaboration with the curriculum committee, reduced pure science subjects and integrated them into more clinically relevant content, including early patient exposure in community settings, while maintaining alignment with national medical competency standards. The revised subjects were well received by students. Following these changes, 64.45% of students agreed/strongly agreed that it aligned with preclinical learning, and overall perception scores significantly increased from 18.03 ± 0.16 to 19.08 ± 0.35 ( t  = 2.819, p  = .003). Conclusion A student-driven approach, supported by the CIPP model, helped redesign the premedical curriculum. It integrated relevant basic sciences with early community and clinical exposure to enhance alignment, engagement, and preparedness for clinical training.