Department of Physiology, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia
Department of Physiology, University of Zagreb School of Medicine, Zagreb, Croatia.
Adv Physiol Educ. 2016 Sep;40(3):383-7. doi: 10.1152/advan.00187.2015.
The goal of the present study was to determine whether an active learning/teaching strategy facilitated with mobile technologies can improve students' levels of memory retention of key physiological concepts. We used a quasiexperimental pretest/posttest nonequivalent group design to compare the test performances of second-year medical students (n = 311) taught by conventional didactic methods (traditional group) with those involved in a case-based problem-solving learning approach facilitated with mobile phones as web-based "clickers" (experimental group). Using their cell phones, students answered the same questions about the key physiological concepts three times. A pretest to determine their baseline knowledge was followed by two followup tests after 1 wk and 2 mo, respectively. The experimental group scored a mean of 93.2% correct items after 1 wk and 84.8% correct items after 2 mo [95% confidence intervals: (89.4, 97.0) and (79.4, 90.3), respectively]. Compared with their colleagues in the traditional group who scored 33.3% [95% confidence interval: (18.9, 47.8)] and 38.5% [95% confidence interval: (23.6, 53.4)] correct items, respectively, this was a significant increase of ∼50% (P < 0.0001). Furthermore, for the experimental group, Cohen's effect size (d) values of d = 1.67 (1-wk posttest) and d = 1.38 (2-mo posttest) suggested a very high practical significance. In contrast, in the traditional group, Cohen's d values of d = 0.04 (1-wk posttest) and d = 0.15 (2-mo posttest) assumed a very low practical significance.
本研究的目的是确定是否可以通过使用移动技术辅助的主动学习/教学策略来提高学生对关键生理概念的记忆保留水平。我们使用类实验前测后测非等组设计来比较使用传统教学方法（传统组）教授的二年级医学生（n = 311）与使用手机作为基于网络的“点击器”辅助的基于案例的问题解决学习方法（实验组）的学生的测试表现。学生使用手机回答关于关键生理概念的相同问题三次。在进行前测以确定其基线知识后，分别在 1 周和 2 个月后进行了两次后续测试。实验组在 1 周后平均答对 93.2%的项目，在 2 个月后平均答对 84.8%的项目[95%置信区间：（89.4，97.0）和（79.4，90.3）]。与传统组中得分分别为 33.3%[95%置信区间：（18.9，47.8）]和 38.5%[95%置信区间：（23.6，53.4）]的同事相比，这是一个显著的增加了约 50%（P < 0.0001）。此外，对于实验组，Cohen 的效应量（d）值为 d = 1.67（1 周后测试）和 d = 1.38（2 个月后测试），表明具有非常高的实际意义。相比之下，在传统组中，Cohen 的 d 值为 d = 0.04（1 周后测试）和 d = 0.15（2 个月后测试），表明具有非常低的实际意义。
