Dataset Information

Is lecture dead? A preliminary study of medical students' evaluation of teaching methods in the preclinical curriculum.

ABSTRACT: To investigate medical students' perceptions of lecture and non-lecture-based instructional methods and compare preferences for use and quantity of each during preclinical training.We administered a survey to first- and second-year undergraduate medical students at the University of Alabama School of Medicine in Birmingham, Alabama, USA aimed to evaluate preferred instructional methods. Using a cross-sectional study design, Likert scale ratings and student rankings were used to determine preferences among lecture, laboratory, team-based learning, simulation, small group case-based learning, large group case-based learning, patient presentation, and peer teaching. We calculated mean ratings for each instructional method and used chi-square tests to compare proportions of first- and second-year cohorts who ranked each in their top 5 preferred methods.Among participating students, lecture (M=3.6, SD=1.0), team based learning (M=4.2, SD=1.0), simulation (M=4.0, SD=1.0), small group case-based learning (M=3.8, SD=1.0), laboratory (M=3.6, SD=1.0), and patient presentation (M=3.8, SD=0.9) received higher scores than other instructional methods. Overall, second-year students ranked lecture lower (?2(1, N=120) =16.33, p<0.0001) and patient presentation higher (?2(1, N=120) =3.75, p=0.05) than first-year students.While clinically-oriented teaching methods were preferred by second-year medical students, lecture-based instruction was popular among first-year students. Results warrant further investigation to determine the ideal balance of didactic methods in undergraduate medical education, specifically curricula that employ patient-oriented instruction during the second preclinical year.

SUBMITTER: Zinski A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5699863 | biostudies-other | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is lecture dead? A preliminary study of medical students' evaluation of teaching methods in the preclinical curriculum.

Zinski Anne A Blackwell Kristina T C Panizzi Woodley KTCPW Belue F Mike FM Brooks William S WS

International journal of medical education 20170922

<h4>Objectives</h4>To investigate medical students' perceptions of lecture and non-lecture-based instructional methods and compare preferences for use and quantity of each during preclinical training.<h4>Methods</h4>We administered a survey to first- and second-year undergraduate medical students at the University of Alabama School of Medicine in Birmingham, Alabama, USA aimed to evaluate preferred instructional methods. Using a cross-sectional study design, Likert scale ratings and student ran ...[more]

PMID: 28945195

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing interest in global health teaching among medical schools and their students. Schools in the UK and internationally are considering the best structure, methods and content of global health courses. Academic work in this area, however, has tended to either be normative (specifying what global health teaching ought to look like) or descriptive (of a particular intervention, new module, elective, etc.).MethodsWhile a number of studies have explored student perspectives on global health teaching, these have often relied on tools such as questionnaires that generate little in-depth evidence. This study instead used qualitative methods to explore medical student perspectives on global health in the context of a new global health module established in the core medical curriculum at a UK medical school.ResultsFifth year medical students participated in a structured focus group session and semi-structured interviews designed to explore their knowledge and learning about global health issues, as well as their wider perspectives on these issues and their relevance to professional development. While perspectives on global health ranged from global health 'advocate' to 'sceptic', all of the students acknowledged the challenges of prioritising global health within a busy curriculum.ConclusionsStudents are highly alert to the diverse epistemological issues that underpin global health. For some students, such interdisciplinarity is fundamental to understanding contemporary health and healthcare. For others, global health is merely a topic of geographic relevance. Furthermore, some students appeared to accept global health as a specialist area only relevant to professionals working overseas, while others considered it to be an essential part of working in the globalised world and therefore relevant to all medical professionals. Students also clearly noted that including 'soft' subjects and more discursive approaches to teaching and learning often sits awkwardly in a programme where 'harder' forms of knowledge and didactic methods tend to dominate. This suggests that more work needs to be done to explain the relevance of global health to medical students at the very beginning of their studies.

Project description:BackgroundSimulation training has potential in developing clinical skills in pre-clinical medical students, but there is little evidence on its effectiveness.MethodsTwenty four first year graduate entry preclinical medical students participated in this crossover study. They were divided into two groups, one performed chest examination on each other and the other used SimMan. The groups then crossed over. A pretest, midtest and post-test was conducted in which the students answered the same questionnaire with ten questions on knowledge, and confidence levels rated using a 5 point Likert scale. They were assessed formatively using the OSCE marking scheme. At the end of the session, 23 students completed a feedback questionnaire. Data was analyzed using one-way ANOVA and independent t-test.ResultsWhen the two groups were compared, there was no significant difference in the pretest and the post-test scores on knowledge questions whereas the midtest scores increased significantly (P< 0.001) with the group using SimMan initially scoring higher. A significant increase in the test scores was seen between the pre-test and the mid-test for this group (P=0.009). There was a similar albeit non significant trend between the midtest and the post-test for the group using peer examination initially.Mean confidence ratings increased from the pretest to midtest and then further in the post-test for both groups. Their confidence ratings increased significantly in differentiating between normal and abnormal signs [Group starting with SimMan, between pretest and midtest (P= 0.01) and group starting with peer examination, between midtest and post-test (P=0.02)]. When the students' ability to perform examination on each other for both groups was compared, there was a significant increase in the scores of the group starting with SimMan (P=0.007).ConclusionsThis pilot study demonstrated a significant improvement in the students' knowledge and competence to perform chest examination after simulation with an increase in the student's perceived levels of confidence. Feedback from the students was extremely positive. SimMan acts as a useful adjunct to teach clinical skills to preclinical medical students by providing a simulated safe environment and thus aids in bridging the gap between the preclinical and clinical years in medical undergraduate education.

Dataset Information

Is lecture dead? A preliminary study of medical students' evaluation of teaching methods in the preclinical curriculum.

Publications

Is lecture dead? A preliminary study of medical students' evaluation of teaching methods in the preclinical curriculum.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets