Dataset Information

Choosing Wisely in Pre-clinical Medical Education: a Direct Comparison of Active Learning Methods for Teaching Metabolic Liver Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background

With the movement away from lectures and towards active learning sessions, medical school faculty must choose a format that fits the learning objectives and is achievable with available resources. Small groups bring organizational challenges including additional faculty and classrooms. Large groups are an opportunity to conduct case-based active learning exercises with fewer faculty. Our study compares the learning effectiveness of an active learning session on metabolic liver disease conducted in both the small group and large group formats.

Methods

All MS1 students at University of Vermont Larner College of Medicine (LCOM) (n = 120) were randomized to participate in either the small or large group session. The same pre-learning videos and computer-based active learning module were used for all students in both session types. A post-session questionnaire was administered, and student exam performance was analyzed to evaluate each session type on the following criteria: (1) student preparedness for the session, (2) student perceptions of the session's learning effectiveness, (3) learner knowledge upon completion of the session, and (4) knowledge retention at 10 days.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found between the large and small group cohorts on student perceptions of learning effectiveness or knowledge assessment, both immediate and delayed. Students assigned to the large group did choose their collaborators differently than those in the small group, tending more often to work with their friends.

Conclusion

When organized well, a large group active learning format may be used in place of a small group without diminishing the learning effectiveness of the activity.

SUBMITTER: Carson E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8368552 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: There is general consensus that the organizational and administrative aspects of academic study programs exert an important influence on teaching and learning. Despite this, no comprehensive framework currently exists to describe the conditions that affect the quality of teaching and learning in medical education. The aim of this paper is to systematically and comprehensively identify these factors to offer academic administrators and decision makers interested in improving teaching a theory-based and, to an extent, empirically founded framework on the basis of which improvements in teaching quality can be identified and implemented. Method: Primarily, the issue was addressed by combining a theory-driven deductive approach with an experience based, "best evidence" one during the course of two workshops held by the GMA Committee on Personnel and Organizational Development in Academic Teaching (POiL) in Munich (2013) and Frankfurt (2014). Two models describing the conditions relevant to teaching and learning (Euler/Hahn and Rindermann) were critically appraised and synthesized into a new third model. Practical examples of teaching strategies that promote or hinder learning were compiled and added to the categories of this model and, to the extent possible, supported with empirical evidence. Based on this, a checklist with recommendations for optimizing general academic conditions was formulated. Results: The Frankfurt Model of conditions to ensure Quality in Teaching and Learning covers six categories: organizational structure/medical school culture, regulatory frameworks, curricular requirements, time constraints, material and personnel resources, and qualification of teaching staff. These categories have been supplemented by the interests, motives and abilities of the actual teachers and students in this particular setting. The categories of this model provide the structure for a checklist in which recommendations for optimizing teaching are given. Conclusions: The checklist derived from the Frankfurt Model for ensuring quality in teaching and learning can be used for quality assurance and to improve the conditions under which teaching and learning take place in medical schools.

Project description:BackgroundMajor disruptions and changes in education have occurred worldwide as a result of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and the ensuing shift from in-person to online education. However, the effect of such changes on medical education, its magnitude, and the learning domains impacted by such rapid changes have not been adequately addressed, particularly with regard to objective assessment approaches.MethodsSecond-year medical students enrolled in our Medical English Course between 2019 and 2021 were recruited from Hokkaido University, Japan (N = 321) to participate in this study. We evaluated the potential impact of teaching styles on the academic performance of students before (2019; face-to-face) and during (2020; online; 2021; in-person and online) the pandemic. We examined the potential effect of three teaching styles--in-person (2019), online (2020), and a combination of these (2021) on the academic performance of medical students using: (i) subjective assessment of self-reported general English skills, including reading, writing, listening, and speaking; and (ii) objective assessment of medical terminology scores, evidence-based medicine (EBM) skills, and final written exam scores.ResultsIn-person education significantly improved listening and speaking skills in 2019 (p < 0.001). This trend was observed for writing skills in an online course in 2020 (p = 0.001). With the combined teaching method, students reported significant improvements in all four English skills. In our objective assessments, medical terminology improved significantly post-test versus pre-test for all three teaching styles, and we found that the online course did not adversely affect the gain in medical terminology knowledge during the course. Additionally, we did not find any significant differences across the three applied teaching styles regarding EBM skill levels. It is noteworthy that the students taking online courses had a significantly higher final exam score (mean ± SD; 82.8 ± 8.2) than in in-person (78.6 ± 8.8) and combined (79.7 ± 12.1) teaching styles.ConclusionsIn our study, the online/combined courses showed better academic outcomes compared to the face-to-face course in the preclinical clerkship. Although the current results need to be replicated on a larger scale, online/combined courses can continue and evolve in the post-pandemic education of medical students. Medical schools and institutions should consider incorporating such courses, especially combined courses, into their curricula in the future to improve the effectiveness, accessibility, and flexibility of medical education.