Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2010, 7 6 grades. Module teachers were provided with information about the survey (aims, objectives, and the voluntary nature of participation), and were subsequently approached for permission to collect data from the students attending their module. Data protection and confidentiality were observed, and students‘ grades were imported from the university database. Both questionnaires were administered towards the end of two different teaching sessions (usually the last 5 minutes in the satisfaction survey and 30 minutes in the health survey). A participant information sheet was attached to each questionnaire, and students who remained in the class to participate were asked to read the information sheet and, if they wished to participate, to remove and keep it for future reference. In this manner it was ensured that the students who stayed in the class in order to complete the survey consented to their participation and were not unwittingly coerced into the survey. The response rates were ≈80% for the health survey and the student satisfaction survey. For the analysis, we used data from students who completed both surveys (380 students). 2.2. Students’ Satisfaction Questionnaire and Marks A one-page questionnaire was employed to inquire about multiple aspects of students‘ learning and teaching experience. It was adopted from a tool that was developed and validated by researchers in a British University [49]. The 27 questionnaire items were closed ended items scored on 5-point scales (1 = ‗Positive Perception‘ and 5 = ‗Negative Perception‘). The questionnaire is detailed elsewhere [50,51] (copies of the questionnaire are available from the first author). Similar to other studies [32], students‘ registration numbers linked the questionnaires to the university database, and students‘ module marks were imported as percentages [31]. The satisfaction items inquired about the module team, assessment method/s, the integration of the various parts of the module, as well as the seminars, and the intellectual stimulation of the educational experience (Box 1). Box 1. Eighteen satisfaction items assessed for each module*. 1. Module ran smoothly 2. Module increased my interest in the subject 3. Module team provided opportunity to ask questions 4. Module material was well presented 5. Module was thought provoking 6. Module assessment methods were appropriate 7. Module team displayed good knowledge 8. Module team correctly assumed level of skills I had 9. Module information available at beginning of module 10. Received helpful feedback 11. Seminar group sizes were small enough 12. References needed for module available in library 13. Work required for module was appropriate 14. Module elements integrated into meaningful whole 15. Module was intellectually stimulating 16. Module is expected to be of direct use in my career 17. Module made me look at my profession differently 18. Module team styles were clear/ informative/ stimulating * Each item was rated on 5-point Likert scale (1 = very positive evaluation, 5 = very negative evaluation).