Suppr超能文献

二年级病理学课程中的主动学习

Active learning in a Year 2 pathology curriculum.

作者信息

Koles Paul, Nelson Stuart, Stolfi Adrienne, Parmelee Dean, Destephen Dan

机构信息

Wright State University School of Medicine, Dayton, Ohio 45435-0001, USA.

出版信息

Med Educ. 2005 Oct;39(10):1045-55. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02248.x.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Team-based learning (TBL) has been successfully used in non-medical curricula, but its effectiveness in medical education has not been studied extensively. We evaluated the impact of TBL on the academic performance of Year 2 medical students at Wright State University by comparing this active learning strategy against a traditional method of case-based group discussion (CBGD).

METHODS

A prospective crossover design assigned 83 Year 2 medical students to either CBGD or TBL for 8 pathology modules in the systems-based curriculum. The effectiveness of both learning methods was assessed by performance on pathology-based examination questions contained in end-of-course examinations. The highest and lowest academic quartiles of students were evaluated separately. Students' opinions of both methods were surveyed.

RESULTS

No significant differences in whole group performance on pathology-based examination questions were observed as a consequence of experiencing TBL versus CBGD. However, students in the lowest academic quartile showed better examination performance after experiencing TBL than CBGD in 4 of 8 modules (P = 0.035). Students perceived that the contributions of peers to learning were more helpful during TBL than CBGD (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that TBL and CBGD are equally effective active learning strategies when employed in a systems-based pre-clinical pathology curriculum, but students with lower academic performance may benefit more from TBL than CBGD.

摘要

目的

基于团队的学习(TBL)已成功应用于非医学课程,但在医学教育中的有效性尚未得到广泛研究。我们通过将这种主动学习策略与传统的基于案例的小组讨论(CBGD)方法进行比较,评估了TBL对赖特州立大学二年级医学生学业成绩的影响。

方法

采用前瞻性交叉设计,将83名二年级医学生分配到基于系统的课程中的8个病理学模块,分别采用CBGD或TBL方法。通过课程结束考试中基于病理学的考试问题的表现来评估两种学习方法的有效性。对学生的最高和最低学术四分位数分别进行评估。调查了学生对这两种方法的看法。

结果

经历TBL与CBGD后,基于病理学的考试问题的全组表现没有显著差异。然而,在8个模块中的4个模块中,学术成绩最低的四分位数的学生在经历TBL后比CBGD表现出更好的考试成绩(P = 0.035)。学生们认为,在TBL过程中,同伴对学习的贡献比CBGD更有帮助(P = 0.003)。

结论

本研究表明,在基于系统的临床前病理学课程中,TBL和CBGD是同样有效的主动学习策略,但学术成绩较低的学生可能从TBL中比从CBGD中受益更多。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验