ResearchBib Share Your Research, Maximize Your Social Impacts
Sign for Notice Everyday Sign up >> Login

Nutrition & Dietetics Curriculum for BS Study Program – Assessment and Evaluation

Journal: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENDORSING HEALTH SCIENCE (IJEHSR) (Vol.5, No. 3)

Publication Date:

Authors : ; ;

Page : 4-16

Keywords : Curriculum; Nutrition and Dietetics; www.neat.org.pk;

Source : Downloadexternal Find it from : Google Scholarexternal

Abstract

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the curriculum for BS degree program in Human Nutrition & Dietetics in Pakistan. For this purpose, a working group comprising of experts in the field from NEAT (a Pakistan based registered organization: www.neat.org.pk ) was assigned the responsibility to evaluate the curriculum. As suggested by the working group, a modified Delphi technique was used and a group of expert panelists (n=46) was identified. Three main ‘areas of enquiry' ‘(AE)' were proposed, where the responses from the panels were requested: AE(1) evaluated the curriculum against a set of 15 characteristics reported in the literature; AE(2) evaluated the curriculum against 32-item ‘knowledge areas' based on findings of a recent investigation. AE(3): scored the course contents of individual courses against a ‘perceived standards' in light of a 14-item Battery. For AE(1) and (2) and (3), the panelists responded, respectively, on scoring scale (0 – 4) and ticked any one from 1 -3. The data were analyzed for mean and median scores for each individual item. Findings of AE(1) suggest that majority of the panelists agreed that the curriculum ‘adequately'/'excellently' highlighted the fifteen criteria set-forth. Findings of AE(2) suggest 8 out of 32 ‘knowledge areas' being ‘poorly' reflected in the curriculum. Findings of AE(3) suggest majority (28/43: 65%) of courses fulfill the perceived standards except 2 courses (“Nutrition through Life Cycle”; and “Research Methods in Nutrition”) fulfilling <50% of the required standards. In all, the findings are of suggestive that the curriculum is ‘good' except certain shortfalls. It was recommended that the deficiencies may be addressed in the coming revision.

Last modified: 2017-12-28 20:28:27