Sadiya Ravat, Paula Barnard-Ashton, Monique M Keller
{"title":"威特沃特斯兰德大学物理治疗本科学生的混合教学与传统教学。","authors":"Sadiya Ravat, Paula Barnard-Ashton, Monique M Keller","doi":"10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shifting from face-to-face teaching to incorporating technology may prepare students better for future work as health professionals. Evidence of blended teaching's effect on the academic performance of undergraduate physiotherapy students' performance is scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of our study was to determine students' theoretical and clinical performance in a blended teaching module compared to their own performance in two knowledge areas taught face to face, and student perceptions of blended teaching in the third-year physiotherapy curriculum.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study design included 47 third-year physiotherapy students. The orthopaedic module was delivered using a blended teaching approach in two consecutive semesters, whilst two other physiotherapy knowledge areas, neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary, in the same semesters were delivered face to face. Theoretical and clinical performances of students were compared for significance and effect. Students were assessed on their theoretical and clinical knowledge in all areas using the same assessment methods. The students (<i>n</i> = 43) also completed a survey on their blended teaching experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significantly higher theoretical marks for orthopaedics were calculated compared to neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary for both semesters with a large positive effect (average Cohen <i>d</i> = 4.44) for blended teaching on theoretical examination performance; no statistically significant difference for clinical performances. Students felt engaged in the blended teaching process, and 72% preferred blended teaching over face-to-face teaching or online delivery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Blended teaching improved the theoretical marks, demonstrating that knowledge acquisition was improved, but not clinical performance.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The study contributes to the knowledge base of blended learning in Health Science Education in South Africa. The authors identified a gap where future studies should investigate the effect of blended learning on clinical performance outcomes as a continuation from this one.</p>","PeriodicalId":44180,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":"77 1","pages":"1544"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8182468/pdf/","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Blended teaching versus traditional teaching for undergraduate physiotherapy students at the University of the Witwatersrand.\",\"authors\":\"Sadiya Ravat, Paula Barnard-Ashton, Monique M Keller\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1544\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Shifting from face-to-face teaching to incorporating technology may prepare students better for future work as health professionals. Evidence of blended teaching's effect on the academic performance of undergraduate physiotherapy students' performance is scarce.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The purpose of our study was to determine students' theoretical and clinical performance in a blended teaching module compared to their own performance in two knowledge areas taught face to face, and student perceptions of blended teaching in the third-year physiotherapy curriculum.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The cross-sectional study design included 47 third-year physiotherapy students. The orthopaedic module was delivered using a blended teaching approach in two consecutive semesters, whilst two other physiotherapy knowledge areas, neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary, in the same semesters were delivered face to face. Theoretical and clinical performances of students were compared for significance and effect. Students were assessed on their theoretical and clinical knowledge in all areas using the same assessment methods. The students (<i>n</i> = 43) also completed a survey on their blended teaching experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significantly higher theoretical marks for orthopaedics were calculated compared to neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary for both semesters with a large positive effect (average Cohen <i>d</i> = 4.44) for blended teaching on theoretical examination performance; no statistically significant difference for clinical performances. Students felt engaged in the blended teaching process, and 72% preferred blended teaching over face-to-face teaching or online delivery.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Blended teaching improved the theoretical marks, demonstrating that knowledge acquisition was improved, but not clinical performance.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The study contributes to the knowledge base of blended learning in Health Science Education in South Africa. The authors identified a gap where future studies should investigate the effect of blended learning on clinical performance outcomes as a continuation from this one.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"volume\":\"77 1\",\"pages\":\"1544\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8182468/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1544\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v77i1.1544","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
背景:从面对面的教学转变为结合技术可以使学生更好地为未来的卫生专业人员工作做好准备。混合教学对本科物理治疗专业学生学业成绩影响的证据很少。目的:本研究的目的是比较学生在混合教学模块中的理论和临床表现与他们自己在面对面教学的两个知识领域的表现,以及学生对三年级物理治疗课程混合教学的看法。方法:采用横断面研究设计对47名理疗专业大三学生进行调查。骨科模块在连续两个学期中采用混合教学方法进行授课,而其他两个物理治疗知识领域,神经肌肉骨骼和心肺,在同一学期中进行面对面授课。比较学生的理论表现和临床表现的意义和效果。使用相同的评估方法对学生在所有领域的理论和临床知识进行评估。这些学生(n = 43)还完成了一份关于他们混合式教学经历的调查。结果:两学期骨科学科的理论成绩均显著高于神经肌肉骨骼学科和心肺学科,且混合教学对理论考试成绩有较大的正向影响(平均Cohen d = 4.44);临床表现差异无统计学意义。学生们觉得自己参与了混合式教学过程,72%的学生更喜欢混合式教学,而不是面对面教学或在线授课。结论:混合教学提高了理论分数,表明知识获取有所改善,但临床表现没有改善。临床意义:本研究有助于建立南非卫生科学教育混合学习的知识库。作者确定了一个差距,未来的研究应该调查混合学习对临床表现结果的影响,作为本研究的延续。
Blended teaching versus traditional teaching for undergraduate physiotherapy students at the University of the Witwatersrand.
Background: Shifting from face-to-face teaching to incorporating technology may prepare students better for future work as health professionals. Evidence of blended teaching's effect on the academic performance of undergraduate physiotherapy students' performance is scarce.
Objective: The purpose of our study was to determine students' theoretical and clinical performance in a blended teaching module compared to their own performance in two knowledge areas taught face to face, and student perceptions of blended teaching in the third-year physiotherapy curriculum.
Methods: The cross-sectional study design included 47 third-year physiotherapy students. The orthopaedic module was delivered using a blended teaching approach in two consecutive semesters, whilst two other physiotherapy knowledge areas, neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary, in the same semesters were delivered face to face. Theoretical and clinical performances of students were compared for significance and effect. Students were assessed on their theoretical and clinical knowledge in all areas using the same assessment methods. The students (n = 43) also completed a survey on their blended teaching experience.
Results: Significantly higher theoretical marks for orthopaedics were calculated compared to neuromusculoskeletal and cardiopulmonary for both semesters with a large positive effect (average Cohen d = 4.44) for blended teaching on theoretical examination performance; no statistically significant difference for clinical performances. Students felt engaged in the blended teaching process, and 72% preferred blended teaching over face-to-face teaching or online delivery.
Conclusion: Blended teaching improved the theoretical marks, demonstrating that knowledge acquisition was improved, but not clinical performance.
Clinical implications: The study contributes to the knowledge base of blended learning in Health Science Education in South Africa. The authors identified a gap where future studies should investigate the effect of blended learning on clinical performance outcomes as a continuation from this one.