Comparative study of self-directed learning and traditional teaching method in understanding cardio- respiratory physiology among medical undergraduates

Authors

  • Suchitra Palve Department of Physiology, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International University, Pune 412115, Maharashtra, India
  • Sachin Palve Department of Community Medicine, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International University, Pune 412115, Maharashtra, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51248/.v42i1.662

Keywords:

Assessment, Didactic, Learner, Physiology, self -directed learning.

Abstract

Introduction and Aim: Active and learner centred learning methods specially, self-directed learning is considered to be an important method of blended learning approach of imparting knowledge among under graduate medical students in new curriculum through integrated approach. The aim of the study is to analyse the impact and benefits of self-directed learning sessions for understanding cardio- respiratory physiology among phase one MBBS students.

Design and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted among 250 students of Phase I MBBS for CVS and RS modules.  Two groups of students were made Group A (n=125) was administered with self- directed learning sessions, while group B (n=125) was administered with normal didactic lecture session for the same topics. Following each session an objective assessment was conducted for all the topics covered in SDL and lecture sessions and the results were assessed and compared.

Results: The maximum marks secured in objective assessment by Group A students post self-directed learning sessions for both cardiovascular and respiratory physiology modules were 31.2% (39/125) and 32.8% (41/125); while moderate marks were secured by 47.2% (59/125) and 48% (60/125). For assessment conducted after lecture sessions for both cardiovascular and respiratory physiology module, maximum marks were obtained by 25.6% (32/125) and 24% (30/125); while moderate marks were obtained by 21.6% (27/125) and 23.5% (29/125) respectively. Significant difference was found in the p values of marks for both modules(n=0.009) (n=0.008). The internal assessment scores showed considerable difference in the maximum marks obtained by students attending SDL sessions (80-89%) as compared to didactic learning sessions (70–79%) with p value = 0.0190, 0.01179 and 0.0192, a0.01184, respectively for both modules.

Conclusion: Self-directed learning method seems to be more effective way of delivering the concept as compared to traditional lecture sessions.

References

https://www.mciindia.org/CMS/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/UG-Curriculum-Vol-I.pdf

https://www.mciindia.org/CMS/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/AETCOM_book.pdf

Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 1997; Part – III, Section (4) Gazette of India vide Medical Council of India notification dated 4th March, 1997, and amended vide MCI notifications dated 14/05/2019.

Wolff, M., Wagner, M.J., Poznanski, S., Schiller, J., Santen, S. Not another boring lecture: engaging learners with active learning techniques. J Emerg Med. 2015; 48(1):85-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2014.09.010

Schwartzstein, R.M., Roberts, D.H. Saying goodbye to lectures in medical school—paradigm shift or passing fad? N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(7):605-607. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1706474

Chilwant, K. Comparison of two teaching methods, structured interactive lectures and conventional lectures. Biomed Res. 2012; 23(3):363-366.

Belfield, C., Thomas, H., Bullock, A., Eynon, R., Wall, D. Measuring effectiveness for best evidence medical education: A discussion. Med Teach. 2001; 23(2):164-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142150020031084

Devlin, M., Samarawickrema, G. The criteria of effective teaching in a changing higher education context. High Educ Res Dev. 2010;29(2):111-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360903244398

Fyrenius, A., Bergdahl, B., Silén, C. Lectures in problem-based learning—why, when, and how? An example of interactive lecturing that stimulates meaningful learning. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):61-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590400016365

Carvalho, H., West, C.A. Voluntary participation in an active learning exercise leads to a better understanding of physiology. Adv Physiol Educ. 2011;35(1):53-58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00011.2010

Zakaryan, V., Bliss, R., Sarvazyan, N. Non-trivial pursuit of physiology. Adv Physiol Educ. 2005;29(1):11-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00031.2004

Samuelson, D.B., Divaris, K., De Kok, I.J. Benefits of case-based versus traditional lecture-based instruction in a preclinical removable prosthodontics course. J Dent Educ. 2017; 81(4):387-394. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21815/JDE.016.005

Remington, T.L., Bleske, B.E., Bartholomew, T., Dorsch, M.P., Guthrie, S.K., Klein, K.C. Qualitative analysis of student perceptions comparing team-based learning and traditional lecture in a Pharmacotherapeutics course. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(3):55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe81355

Joshi, K., Padugupati, S., Robins, M. Assessment of educational outcomes of small group discussion versus traditional lecture format among undergraduate medical students. Int J Commun Med Public Health. 2018; 5(7):2766-2769. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20182419

Newble, D., Entwistle, N. Learning styles and approaches: Implications for medical education. Med Educ. 1986; 20(3):162-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1986.tb01163.x

Samarakoon, L., Fernando, T., Rodrigo, C., Rajapakse, S. Learning styles and approaches to learning among medical undergraduates and postgraduates. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13(1):42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-42

Abraham, R., Vinod, P., Kamath, M., Asha, K., Ramnarayan, K. Learning approaches of undergraduate medical students to physiology in a non-PBL and partially PBL-oriented curriculum. Adv Physiol Educ. 2008;32(1):35-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00063.2007

Kermaniyan, F., Mehdizadeh, M., Iravani, S., MArkazi Moghadam, N., Shayan, S. Comparing lecture and problem-based learning methods in teaching limb anatomy to first year medical students. Iranian J Med Educ. 2008; 7(2):379-388.

Kilroy, D.A. Problem based learning. Emerg Med J. 2004;21(4):411-413. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/emj.2003.012435

Murphy, K.P., Crush, L., O’Malley, E. Medical student knowledge regarding radiology before and after a radiological anatomy module: implications for vertical integration and self-directed learning. Insights Imaging. 2014;5(5):629-634. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-014-0346-0

Pai, K.M., Rao, K.R., Punja, D., Kamath, A. The effectiveness of self-directed learning (SDL) for teaching physiology to first-year medical students. Australas Med J. 2014;7(11):448-453. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4066/AMJ.2014.2211

Blumberg, P., Evensen, D.H., Hmelo, C.E. Evaluating the evidence that problem-based learners are self-directed learners: a review of the literature. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2000;199-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604989

Shokar, G.S., Shokar, N.K., Romero, CM., Bulik, RJ. Self-directed learning: looking at outcomes with medical students. Fam Med. 2002; 34(3): 197-200.

Atta, I.S., AlQahtani, F.N. How to adjust the strategy of radiopathologic teaching to achieve the learning outcomes? Int J Med Sci Public Health. 2018;7(2):86-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/ijmsph.2018.1130015122017

Atta, I.S., AlQahtani, F.N. Matching medical student achievement to learning objectives and outcomes: a paradigm shifts for an implemented teaching module. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2018; 9:227–233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S158784

Downloads

Published

2022-03-05

How to Cite

1.
Palve S, Palve S. Comparative study of self-directed learning and traditional teaching method in understanding cardio- respiratory physiology among medical undergraduates. Biomedicine [Internet]. 2022 Mar. 5 [cited 2022 Nov. 27];42(1):138-42. Available from: https://biomedicineonline.org/home/article/view/662

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles

Plum Analytics