MATERIALS AND METHODS: The module was developed based on the ADDIE (Analyse, Design, Develop, Implement, Evaluate) model. First, a need analysis was conducted, followed by designing the module to address the needs. Next, the module sought experts' feedback and was piloted. The revised module was implemented among all second-year undergraduate dental students. Finally, a validated questionnaire (5-point Likert scale items and open-ended questions) was used to evaluate students' learning experiences. The questionnaire Likert scale items were analysed descriptively, whereas open-ended responses were analysed using content analysis.
RESULTS: In the analysis phase, a slight misalignment in cognitive competency levels was observed, alongside a need for the inclusion of more hands-on activities. In the design phase, learning objectives and resources were listed. Subsequently, a module consisting of four teaching sessions (3 h each) was developed, and the pilot test showed favourable feedback. The module was then implemented in small groups of 10-12 students. In the evaluation phase, 72 students (97% response rate) completed the questionnaire. The majority of students agreed with all items, with mean scores ranging from 4.53 to 4.72. Open-ended responses highlighted that hands-on activities and reflective feedback sessions were useful.
CONCLUSION: Students demonstrated positive learning experiences after participating in the module, advocating for dental educators to consider more hands-on activities and reflective feedback sessions in teaching dental materials science.
METHODS: Final-year medical students across three campuses (Ireland, Bahrain and Malaysia) were invited to share experiences of feedback in individual semi-structured interviews. The data were thematically analysed and explored through the lens of self-regulatory learning theory (SRL).
RESULTS: Feedback interacts with learners' knowledge and beliefs about themselves and about learning. They use feedback to change both their cognitive and behavioural learning strategies, but how they choose which feedback to implement is complex. They struggle to generate learning strategies and expect teachers to make sense of the "how" in addition to the "what"" in planning future learning. Even when not actioned, learners spend time with feedback and it influences future learning.
CONCLUSION: By exploring our findings through the lens of self-regulation learning, we advance conceptual understanding of feedback responses. Learners' ability to generate "next steps" may be overestimated. When feedback causes negative emotions, energy is diverted from learning to processing distress. Perceived non-implementation of feedback should not be confused with ignoring it; feedback that is not actioned often impacts learning.