Nesbitt Leslie M, Cliff William H
Department of Biology, Niagara University, Lewiston, NY 14109, USA.
Adv Physiol Educ. 2008 Dec;32(4):279-85. doi: 10.1152/advan.90158.2008.
Open-ended or closed-ended case study design schemes offer different educational advantages. Anatomy and physiology faculty members who participated in a conference workshop were given an identical case about blood doping and asked to build either an open-ended study or a closed-ended study. The workshop participants created a rich array of case questions. Participant-written learning objectives and case questions were compared, and the questions were examined to determine whether they satisfied criteria for open or closed endedness. Many of the participant-written learning objectives were not well matched with the case questions, and participants had differing success writing suitable case questions. Workshop participants were more successful in creating closed-ended questions than open-ended ones. Eighty-eight percent of the questions produced by participants assigned to write closed-ended questions were considered closed ended, whereas only 43% of the questions produced by participants assigned to write open-ended questions were deemed open ended. Our findings indicate that, despite the fact that instructors of anatomy and physiology recognize the value of open-ended questions, they have greater difficulty in creating them. We conclude that faculty should pay careful attention to learning outcomes as they craft open-ended case questions if they wish to ensure that students are prompted to use and improve their higher-order thinking skills.
开放式或封闭式案例研究设计方案具有不同的教育优势。参加会议研讨会的解剖学和生理学教员收到了一个关于血液兴奋剂的相同案例，并被要求构建一个开放式研究或封闭式研究。研讨会参与者提出了丰富多样的案例问题。对参与者编写的学习目标和案例问题进行了比较，并对问题进行了审查，以确定它们是否符合开放式或封闭式的标准。许多参与者编写的学习目标与案例问题不太匹配，并且参与者在编写合适的案例问题方面取得的成功程度各不相同。研讨会参与者在创建封闭式问题方面比开放式问题更成功。被分配编写封闭式问题的参与者提出的问题中有88%被认为是封闭式的，而被分配编写开放式问题的参与者提出的问题中只有43%被视为开放式的。我们的研究结果表明，尽管解剖学和生理学教员认识到开放式问题的价值，但他们在创建这些问题时面临更大的困难。我们得出结论，如果教员希望确保促使学生运用和提高他们的高阶思维技能，那么在精心设计开放式案例问题时应仔细关注学习成果。
