Case Study: Science Education Reform in a Public University Hospital Network

Thesis Abstract

The rapid evolution of biomedical education within hospital-based teaching environments poses persistent challenges to aligning science curriculum, clinical practice, and student competencies in public university hospital networks. This study investigates how a defined reform of science education within a major public university hospital network influences teaching efficacy, learner engagement, and clinical reasoning among medical and allied health students. The problem addressed concerns gaps between policy-driven educational reforms and on-the-ground instructional practice, including limited interprofessional collaboration, variable access to authentic clinical data, and uneven integration of inquiry-based learning across departments. The aim is to evaluate the implementation process and outcomes of a science education reform initiative over two academic years, with specific objectives to (i) assess changes in instructional quality and student engagement, (ii) examine impacts on clinical reasoning, diagnostic literacy, and research literacy among learners, (iii) identify facilitators and barriers to reform adoption at the departmental and institutional levels, and (iv) develop a set of evidence-based recommendations to optimize scalable reform in similar hospital-network contexts. The study is guided by a pragmatic philosophical paradigm to capture both qualitative and quantitative dimensions of the reform's effectiveness and its contextual fit. Theoretical framing integrates situated cognition theory to explain how authentic clinical contexts shape learning, and Communities of Practice theory to illuminate interprofessional collaboration and knowledge sharing during the reform rollout. A mixed-methods design was employed. The population comprises all medical, nursing, and biomedical sciences students (n = 1,200) enrolled in years 2–5 and 250 tutors across five faculties within the network’s medical education programs. A stratified random sample of 600 students and 90 tutors was selected for quantitative data, complemented by purposive sampling of 40 clinical mentors and 20 educational coordinators for qualitative insights. Data collection instruments included standardized classroom observation rubrics, validated student engagement surveys, objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) stations tailored to measure clinical reasoning and diagnostic literacy, and a knowledge-skills-attitudes (KSA) questionnaire aligned with reform objectives. Qualitative data were obtained through semi-structured interviews (n = 60) and focus group discussions (n = 10 groups) with students, tutors, clinicians, and administrators. Instrument validity was established via expert panels and pilot testing (Cronbach’s alpha for surveys >0.85; inter-rater reliability for observation rubrics >0.80). Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, multiple regression to determine predictors of improved clinical reasoning, ANOVA to compare learning outcomes across departments, and thematic analysis (NVivo) of interview and focus group transcripts to identify emergent patterns related to reform implementation, with triangulation to enhance credibility. A conceptual model depicting the relationships among reform inputs, instructional processes, learner outcomes, and organizational context was iteratively refined through analysis. Expected findings include statistically significant improvements in student engagement (effect size partial ?2 ? 0.08–0.12), OSCE-based measures of clinical reasoning and diagnostic accuracy (mean increase of 12–15 percentage points), and gains in research literacy as evidenced by project-based outcomes and KSA scores (p < 0.05). Qualitative findings are anticipated to reveal that authentic clinical datasets, interprofessional teams, and structured mentoring substantially enhance perceived relevance and transfer of knowledge, while impediments such as workload pressures, inconsistent assessment alignment, and variable faculty development exposure constrain reform uptake. The study is positioned to reveal differential effects by discipline and year of study, with interprofessional learning clusters showing the most pronounced gains. Contribution to knowledge includes empirical evidence on how to operationalize science education reform within university hospital networks to produce measurable improvements in clinical reasoning and interprofessional collaboration, extending theory in situated cognition and Communities of Practice to health professional education in resource-constrained hospital settings. The practical implications include a validated implementation framework, set of scalable assessment tools, and a menu of evidence-based practices for sustaining reform across similar institutions. The study concludes that ongoing investment in faculty development, aligned assessment, and embedded authentic clinical experiences is essential for durable reform, and recommends policy refinements to governance structures, resource allocation, and cross-departmental collaboration protocols to maximize replicability and impact in public university hospital networks.