{"title":"非主要本科生对小组讨论在生理学学习中的影响的看法。","authors":"Elikplimi K Asem","doi":"10.1152/advan.00030.2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A 3-year study (2017-2019) was conducted to obtain the views of nonmajor undergraduate students about discussions in learning physiology. The teaching methods used were lecture only (lecture), group discussion alone (discussion), and a combination of lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students were assigned homework in a textbook, and they did not have access to textbook/notes during discussions. Under these conditions, 58% of students indicated that they learned best with lecture + discussion strategy, compared with 49% for lecture and 18% for discussion approaches. Remarkably, 61% of students said the discussion did not enhance learning; by comparison, 35% and 14% had the same views about lecture and lecture + discussion, respectively. Furthermore, if given the opportunity to choose a teaching/learning environment, 66% of students would select lecture + discussion, 33% would pick lecture, and only 6% would choose discussion setting. As many as 77% of students would reject the discussion setting if given the choice. The opinions of students were similar irrespective of their expected grades (whether A, B, or C); however, greater proportions of B or C students disliked discussion than A students. Thus, whereas 63% of A students disliked discussion, 81% of B students and 83% of C students disliked it. Also, 64% of students indicated that they would have been poorly prepared for classes without assigned homework. Essential outcomes of this study include undergraduates viewed the lecture + discussion setting as a supportive/desirable environment for learning physiology, and they consistently rated the lecture method higher than the discussion-only approach. Students did not relish learning physiology in a discussion-only setting. These findings may help in establishing teaching/learning environments from the student's perspective.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This article reports perspectives of nonmajor undergraduates about group discussions in learning physiology. Three teaching methods were used: traditional lecture alone (lecture), discussion alone (discussion), and combined lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students rated lecture + discussion setting as the most conducive for learning. The rank order of student preference for learning environment was, first, lecture + discussion; second, lecture; and third, discussion. These opinions were similar irrespective of expected grades in the course. Enjoyment of the teaching/learning process and environment is important to students.</p>","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":" ","pages":"856-864"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perspectives of nonmajor undergraduate students on the impact of group discussions in learning physiology.\",\"authors\":\"Elikplimi K Asem\",\"doi\":\"10.1152/advan.00030.2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A 3-year study (2017-2019) was conducted to obtain the views of nonmajor undergraduate students about discussions in learning physiology. The teaching methods used were lecture only (lecture), group discussion alone (discussion), and a combination of lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students were assigned homework in a textbook, and they did not have access to textbook/notes during discussions. Under these conditions, 58% of students indicated that they learned best with lecture + discussion strategy, compared with 49% for lecture and 18% for discussion approaches. Remarkably, 61% of students said the discussion did not enhance learning; by comparison, 35% and 14% had the same views about lecture and lecture + discussion, respectively. Furthermore, if given the opportunity to choose a teaching/learning environment, 66% of students would select lecture + discussion, 33% would pick lecture, and only 6% would choose discussion setting. As many as 77% of students would reject the discussion setting if given the choice. The opinions of students were similar irrespective of their expected grades (whether A, B, or C); however, greater proportions of B or C students disliked discussion than A students. Thus, whereas 63% of A students disliked discussion, 81% of B students and 83% of C students disliked it. Also, 64% of students indicated that they would have been poorly prepared for classes without assigned homework. Essential outcomes of this study include undergraduates viewed the lecture + discussion setting as a supportive/desirable environment for learning physiology, and they consistently rated the lecture method higher than the discussion-only approach. Students did not relish learning physiology in a discussion-only setting. These findings may help in establishing teaching/learning environments from the student's perspective.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This article reports perspectives of nonmajor undergraduates about group discussions in learning physiology. Three teaching methods were used: traditional lecture alone (lecture), discussion alone (discussion), and combined lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students rated lecture + discussion setting as the most conducive for learning. The rank order of student preference for learning environment was, first, lecture + discussion; second, lecture; and third, discussion. These opinions were similar irrespective of expected grades in the course. Enjoyment of the teaching/learning process and environment is important to students.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Physiology Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"856-864\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Physiology Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00030.2023\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00030.2023","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Perspectives of nonmajor undergraduate students on the impact of group discussions in learning physiology.
A 3-year study (2017-2019) was conducted to obtain the views of nonmajor undergraduate students about discussions in learning physiology. The teaching methods used were lecture only (lecture), group discussion alone (discussion), and a combination of lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students were assigned homework in a textbook, and they did not have access to textbook/notes during discussions. Under these conditions, 58% of students indicated that they learned best with lecture + discussion strategy, compared with 49% for lecture and 18% for discussion approaches. Remarkably, 61% of students said the discussion did not enhance learning; by comparison, 35% and 14% had the same views about lecture and lecture + discussion, respectively. Furthermore, if given the opportunity to choose a teaching/learning environment, 66% of students would select lecture + discussion, 33% would pick lecture, and only 6% would choose discussion setting. As many as 77% of students would reject the discussion setting if given the choice. The opinions of students were similar irrespective of their expected grades (whether A, B, or C); however, greater proportions of B or C students disliked discussion than A students. Thus, whereas 63% of A students disliked discussion, 81% of B students and 83% of C students disliked it. Also, 64% of students indicated that they would have been poorly prepared for classes without assigned homework. Essential outcomes of this study include undergraduates viewed the lecture + discussion setting as a supportive/desirable environment for learning physiology, and they consistently rated the lecture method higher than the discussion-only approach. Students did not relish learning physiology in a discussion-only setting. These findings may help in establishing teaching/learning environments from the student's perspective.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This article reports perspectives of nonmajor undergraduates about group discussions in learning physiology. Three teaching methods were used: traditional lecture alone (lecture), discussion alone (discussion), and combined lecture and discussion (lecture + discussion). Students rated lecture + discussion setting as the most conducive for learning. The rank order of student preference for learning environment was, first, lecture + discussion; second, lecture; and third, discussion. These opinions were similar irrespective of expected grades in the course. Enjoyment of the teaching/learning process and environment is important to students.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.