Biomedical Imaging Graduate Curricula and Courses: Report from the 2005 Whitaker Biomedical Engineering Educational Summit

Teaching and learning in biophotonics: Crossing the bridge between educators and students

As a rapidly growing field, biophotonics demonstrates an increasingly higher demand for interdisciplinary professionals and requires the implementation of a structured approach to educational and outreach activities focused on appropriate curriculum, and teaching and learning for audiences with diverse technical backgrounds and learning styles. Our study shows the main findings upon applying this approach to biophotonics workshops delivered 2 consecutive years while updating and improving learning outcomes, teaching strategies, workshop content based on student and teacher feedback. We provided resources for a variety of lecture-based, experimental, computer simulation activities. Quality of subject matter, teaching, and overall learning was rated as "Very good" or "Good" by 88%, 76%, and 82% of students in average, respectively. Application of our teaching strategies and materials during short- and long-term workshops/courses could potentially increase the interest in pursuing careers in the biophotonics field and related areas, leading to standardized approaches in designing education and outreach events across centers.

Fifty Years of Biomedical Engineering Undergraduate Education

Undergraduate education in biomedical engineering (BME) and bioengineering (BioE) has been in place for more than 50 years. It has been important in shaping the field as a whole. The early undergraduate programs developed shortly after BME graduate programs, as universities sought to capitalize on the interest of students and the practical advantages of having BME departments that could control their own resources and curriculum. Unlike other engineering fields, BME did not rely initially on a market for graduates in industry, although BME graduates subsequently have found many opportunities. BME undergraduate programs exploded in the 2000s with funding from the Whitaker Foundation and resources from other agencies such as the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering. The number of programs appears to be reaching a plateau, with 118 accredited programs in the United States at present. We show that there is a core of material that most undergraduates are expected to know, which is different from the knowledge base of other engineers not only in terms of biology, but in the breadth of engineering. We also review the role of important organizations and conferences in the growth of BME, special features of BME education, first placements of BME graduates, and a few challenges to address in the future.

Improvement of medical content in the curriculum of biomedical engineering based on assessment of students outcomes

BACKGROUND

Improvement of medical content in Biomedical Engineering curricula based on a qualitative assessment process or on a comparison with another high-standard program has been approached by a number of studies. However, the quantitative assessment tools have not been emphasized. The quantitative assessment tools can be more accurate and robust in cases of challenging multidisciplinary fields like that of Biomedical Engineering which includes biomedicine elements mixed with technology aspects. The major limitations of the previous research are the high dependence on surveys or pure qualitative approaches as well as the absence of strong focus on medical outcomes without implicit confusion with the technical ones. The proposed work presents the development and evaluation of an accurate/robust quantitative approach to the improvement of the medical content in the challenging multidisciplinary BME curriculum.

METHODS

The work presents quantitative assessment tools and subsequent improvement of curriculum medical content applied, as example for explanation, to the ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, USA) accredited biomedical engineering BME department at Jordan University of Science and Technology. The quantitative results of assessment of curriculum/course, capstone, exit exam, course assessment by student (CAS) as well as of surveys filled by alumni, seniors, employers and training supervisors were, first, mapped to the expected students' outcomes related to the medical field (SOsM). The collected data were then analyzed and discussed to find curriculum weakness points by tracking shortcomings in every outcome degree of achievement. Finally, actions were taken to fill in the gaps of the curriculum. Actions were also mapped to the students' medical outcomes (SOsM).

RESULTS

Weighted averages of obtained quantitative values, mapped to SOsM, indicated accurately the achievement levels of all outcomes as well as the necessary improvements to be performed in curriculum. Mapping the improvements to SOsM also helps in the assessment of the following cycle.

CONCLUSION

The suggested assessment tools can be generalized and extended to any other BME department. Robust improvement of medical content in BME curriculum can subsequently be achieved.