医学本科生药理学小组讨论与课堂教学的比较

Anupama S. Desai, Neeta Banzal
{"title":"医学本科生药理学小组讨论与课堂教学的比较","authors":"Anupama S. Desai, Neeta Banzal","doi":"10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20214088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Conventionally, in most medical colleges, didactic lectures form a major part of teaching, however this method of teaching has many limitations. There has been a paradigm shift in teaching learning methods which now favor enhanced student involvement. Small group discussion (SGD) is one such method which has been frequently compared with didactic lectures. This study aims to compare these two teaching learning methods.Methods: This was a randomized prospective cross sectional, comparative study carried out with 120 second MBBS students of Pharmacology. The students were randomly divided into two groups. Group A was taught by conventional didactic method and group B learnt the same topic by SGD method. For the next topic there was a crossover. After a week students appeared for a test and were asked to fill a 5-point Likert scale perception analysis form.Results: The post-test average scores for didactic lecture were 6.42±2.43 and for SGD were 6.15±2.70 (p value 0.4167). About 88% students agree (50% strongly agree and 38% agree) that SGD is motivating, 85% student agree that SGD is interesting form of learning however 26% student feel that some student dominated in the SGD and 33% student felt more comfortable in lectures.Conclusions: The perception analysis showed that majority of the students found SGD better than didactic lectures in terms of learning, involvement, clearing doubts, increasing self-confidence however analysis of the test scores showed no statistically significant difference amongst the marks obtained after didactic lectures or small group discussion.","PeriodicalId":13901,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of small group discussions and didactic lectures in pharmacology for medical undergraduate students\",\"authors\":\"Anupama S. Desai, Neeta Banzal\",\"doi\":\"10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20214088\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Conventionally, in most medical colleges, didactic lectures form a major part of teaching, however this method of teaching has many limitations. There has been a paradigm shift in teaching learning methods which now favor enhanced student involvement. Small group discussion (SGD) is one such method which has been frequently compared with didactic lectures. This study aims to compare these two teaching learning methods.Methods: This was a randomized prospective cross sectional, comparative study carried out with 120 second MBBS students of Pharmacology. The students were randomly divided into two groups. Group A was taught by conventional didactic method and group B learnt the same topic by SGD method. For the next topic there was a crossover. After a week students appeared for a test and were asked to fill a 5-point Likert scale perception analysis form.Results: The post-test average scores for didactic lecture were 6.42±2.43 and for SGD were 6.15±2.70 (p value 0.4167). About 88% students agree (50% strongly agree and 38% agree) that SGD is motivating, 85% student agree that SGD is interesting form of learning however 26% student feel that some student dominated in the SGD and 33% student felt more comfortable in lectures.Conclusions: The perception analysis showed that majority of the students found SGD better than didactic lectures in terms of learning, involvement, clearing doubts, increasing self-confidence however analysis of the test scores showed no statistically significant difference amongst the marks obtained after didactic lectures or small group discussion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20214088\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20214088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:传统上,在大多数医学院校,教学讲座是教学的重要组成部分,但这种教学方法有许多局限性。教学方法已经发生了范式转变,现在更倾向于提高学生的参与度。小组讨论(SGD)就是这样一种方法,经常与说教式讲座相比较。本研究旨在比较这两种教学方法。方法:这是一项随机前瞻性横断面研究,对120名MBBS药理学专业的学生进行了比较研究。学生们被随机分成两组。A组采用常规教学法,B组采用SGD教学法。下一个话题是交叉的。一周后,学生们参加了一项测试,并被要求填写一份5分李克特量表感知分析表格。结果:教学性讲座的后测平均分为6.42±2.43分,SGD的后测平均分为6.15±2.70分(p值0.4167)。大约88%的学生同意(50%非常同意,38%同意)SGD是一种激励,85%的学生同意SGD是一种有趣的学习形式,然而26%的学生认为一些学生在SGD中占主导地位,33%的学生觉得在课堂上更舒服。结论:感知分析显示,大多数学生认为SGD在学习、投入、消除疑虑、增加自信方面优于说教式讲座,但测试成绩分析显示,说教式讲座和小组讨论的分数之间没有统计学差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of small group discussions and didactic lectures in pharmacology for medical undergraduate students
Background: Conventionally, in most medical colleges, didactic lectures form a major part of teaching, however this method of teaching has many limitations. There has been a paradigm shift in teaching learning methods which now favor enhanced student involvement. Small group discussion (SGD) is one such method which has been frequently compared with didactic lectures. This study aims to compare these two teaching learning methods.Methods: This was a randomized prospective cross sectional, comparative study carried out with 120 second MBBS students of Pharmacology. The students were randomly divided into two groups. Group A was taught by conventional didactic method and group B learnt the same topic by SGD method. For the next topic there was a crossover. After a week students appeared for a test and were asked to fill a 5-point Likert scale perception analysis form.Results: The post-test average scores for didactic lecture were 6.42±2.43 and for SGD were 6.15±2.70 (p value 0.4167). About 88% students agree (50% strongly agree and 38% agree) that SGD is motivating, 85% student agree that SGD is interesting form of learning however 26% student feel that some student dominated in the SGD and 33% student felt more comfortable in lectures.Conclusions: The perception analysis showed that majority of the students found SGD better than didactic lectures in terms of learning, involvement, clearing doubts, increasing self-confidence however analysis of the test scores showed no statistically significant difference amongst the marks obtained after didactic lectures or small group discussion.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Current status of calcitonin gene-related peptide-based therapies in migraine: a scoping review Efficacy of current treatments against hepatitis C virus Adverse drug reactions to first line anti-tuberculosis drugs in newly diagnosed tuberculosis patients Comparing the effect of statins on hepatic fibrosis induced by carbon tetrachloride in Wistar rats Prescription audit of antihypertensive drugs used in stroke patients in a tertiary care teaching hospital
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1