Kathleen Fischer, Michael Sekula, David Hannigan, Randall Vaught, Tarin Williams
{"title":"牙科学生对翻转课堂模式认知的不同因素分析:为期6年的跟踪研究。","authors":"Kathleen Fischer, Michael Sekula, David Hannigan, Randall Vaught, Tarin Williams","doi":"10.1111/eje.13025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>To evaluate different factors affecting two different cohorts of dental students' perceptions with the flipped classroom (FC) model in a preclinical dental course over six years.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In 2016 (cohort #1) and 2022 (cohort #2), second-year dental students participated in FC model in a preclinical dental course consisting of pre-class recorded videos and lectures along with classroom interactive exercises. Students then completed an anonymous pen-and-paper survey evaluating three factors influencing students' overall study experience with the FC model. Survey responses from cohort #1 and cohort #2 were compared to assess the effect of generation, student demographics and COVID-19 pandemic on students' perceptions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>When asked to rate the FC experience out of 5, the mean ratings of cohort #1 and cohort #2 were 4.3 (±0.9) and 4.0 (±0.8), respectively. Cohort #2 preferred viewing slides and videos prior to class and had a higher agreement that pre-class course materials were beneficial to class preparation. Conversely, cohort #1 had a higher agreement that in-class discussion and exercises helped them to learn course content. From cohort #2, 88.6% of males and 71.6% of females preferred the FC approach over traditional lecture.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Both cohorts reported positively with the FC model of teaching. Cohort #2 had higher positive reports with the pre-class work and cohort #1 had a higher positive report with in-class work. Course design should reflect the students' points of view and learning perspectives with careful consideration of the student population in the classroom.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50488,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Dental Education","volume":"28 4","pages":"905-912"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of different factors on dental students' perception of a flipped classroom model: A 6-year follow-up study\",\"authors\":\"Kathleen Fischer, Michael Sekula, David Hannigan, Randall Vaught, Tarin Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/eje.13025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>To evaluate different factors affecting two different cohorts of dental students' perceptions with the flipped classroom (FC) model in a preclinical dental course over six years.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Materials and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>In 2016 (cohort #1) and 2022 (cohort #2), second-year dental students participated in FC model in a preclinical dental course consisting of pre-class recorded videos and lectures along with classroom interactive exercises. Students then completed an anonymous pen-and-paper survey evaluating three factors influencing students' overall study experience with the FC model. Survey responses from cohort #1 and cohort #2 were compared to assess the effect of generation, student demographics and COVID-19 pandemic on students' perceptions.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>When asked to rate the FC experience out of 5, the mean ratings of cohort #1 and cohort #2 were 4.3 (±0.9) and 4.0 (±0.8), respectively. Cohort #2 preferred viewing slides and videos prior to class and had a higher agreement that pre-class course materials were beneficial to class preparation. Conversely, cohort #1 had a higher agreement that in-class discussion and exercises helped them to learn course content. From cohort #2, 88.6% of males and 71.6% of females preferred the FC approach over traditional lecture.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Both cohorts reported positively with the FC model of teaching. Cohort #2 had higher positive reports with the pre-class work and cohort #1 had a higher positive report with in-class work. Course design should reflect the students' points of view and learning perspectives with careful consideration of the student population in the classroom.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Dental Education\",\"volume\":\"28 4\",\"pages\":\"905-912\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Dental Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eje.13025\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Dental Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eje.13025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
简介:目的评估影响两批不同的口腔医学学生在六年内对口腔医学临床前课程翻转课堂(FC)模式的看法的不同因素:2016年(第一批)和2022年(第二批),口腔医学二年级学生参加了口腔医学临床前课程的翻转课堂模式,包括课前录制的视频和讲座以及课堂互动练习。随后,学生们完成了一份匿名纸笔调查,评估了影响学生对 FC 模式总体学习体验的三个因素。将第一批学生和第二批学生的调查反馈进行比较,以评估代沟、学生人口统计学和 COVID-19 大流行对学生看法的影响:当被要求给 FC 体验打 5 分时,第一组学生和第二组学生的平均分分别为 4.3 分(±0.9)和 4.0 分(±0.8)。2 号学生更喜欢在课前观看幻灯片和视频,并更同意课前课程材料有利于备课。相反,1 号学生更认同课堂讨论和练习有助于他们学习课程内容。在第二组学生中,88.6% 的男生和 71.6% 的女生更喜欢 FC 教学法,而不是传统的讲授法:结论:两组学生都对 FC 教学模式给予了积极评价。结论:两组学生都对 FC 教学模式持肯定态度,2 号学生对课前作业的肯定程度较高,1 号学生对课上作业的肯定程度较高。课程设计应反映学生的观点和学习视角,并认真考虑课堂上的学生群体。
Analysis of different factors on dental students' perception of a flipped classroom model: A 6-year follow-up study
Introduction
To evaluate different factors affecting two different cohorts of dental students' perceptions with the flipped classroom (FC) model in a preclinical dental course over six years.
Materials and Methods
In 2016 (cohort #1) and 2022 (cohort #2), second-year dental students participated in FC model in a preclinical dental course consisting of pre-class recorded videos and lectures along with classroom interactive exercises. Students then completed an anonymous pen-and-paper survey evaluating three factors influencing students' overall study experience with the FC model. Survey responses from cohort #1 and cohort #2 were compared to assess the effect of generation, student demographics and COVID-19 pandemic on students' perceptions.
Results
When asked to rate the FC experience out of 5, the mean ratings of cohort #1 and cohort #2 were 4.3 (±0.9) and 4.0 (±0.8), respectively. Cohort #2 preferred viewing slides and videos prior to class and had a higher agreement that pre-class course materials were beneficial to class preparation. Conversely, cohort #1 had a higher agreement that in-class discussion and exercises helped them to learn course content. From cohort #2, 88.6% of males and 71.6% of females preferred the FC approach over traditional lecture.
Conclusion
Both cohorts reported positively with the FC model of teaching. Cohort #2 had higher positive reports with the pre-class work and cohort #1 had a higher positive report with in-class work. Course design should reflect the students' points of view and learning perspectives with careful consideration of the student population in the classroom.
期刊介绍:
The aim of the European Journal of Dental Education is to publish original topical and review articles of the highest quality in the field of Dental Education. The Journal seeks to disseminate widely the latest information on curriculum development teaching methodologies assessment techniques and quality assurance in the fields of dental undergraduate and postgraduate education and dental auxiliary personnel training. The scope includes the dental educational aspects of the basic medical sciences the behavioural sciences the interface with medical education information technology and distance learning and educational audit. Papers embodying the results of high-quality educational research of relevance to dentistry are particularly encouraged as are evidence-based reports of novel and established educational programmes and their outcomes.