Romeike Bernd F M, Fischer Martin
Clin Neuropathol. 2019 Nov/Dec;38(6):285-293. doi: 10.5414/NP301195.
Traditional teacher-centered histopathology training is based on theoretical lectures and practical tutorials. We hypothesize that learning outcomes improve if students are activated by demonstrating cardinal features of slides to each other and discussing their pathogenesis. Buzz groups (BGs) could facilitate this. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of student-centered BGs, i.e., peer-teaching, versus traditional teacher-centered histopathology teaching. Furthermore, we compared digital with analog microscopy.
In addition to traditional guided instruction and explanation of slides, neighboring students demonstrated to each other histopathological features and discussed associated pathogenesis.
After only 4 course lessons, the BG students did much better than the control group (ANCOVA p = 0.002; F = 9.7). Then the control group also applied the BG technique. After another 4 lessons, the control group was able to catch up almost completely (ANCOVA p = 0.36; F = 0.9). Overall, there was no difference in time on task.
Collaborative BGs improve the learning of histopathological competencies. They motivate and activate students to learn. The course also increased the appreciation of students for histopathology. For BGs, digital microscopy was better suited than traditional analog microscopy. The application of BGs in the context of analyzing microscopic images should be disseminated and studied on larger cohorts.
传统的以教师为中心的组织病理学培训基于理论讲座和实践辅导。我们假设，如果学生通过相互展示玻片的主要特征并讨论其发病机制来激发积极性，学习成果将会提高。小组讨论（BGs）可以促进这一点。本研究的目的是调查以学生为中心的BGs（即同伴教学）与传统的以教师为中心的组织病理学教学相比的有效性。此外，我们还比较了数字显微镜和模拟显微镜。
除了传统的对玻片进行指导讲解外，相邻的学生相互展示组织病理学特征并讨论相关的发病机制。
仅经过4节课程后，BG组学生的表现比对照组好得多（协方差分析p = 0.002；F = 9.7）。然后对照组也应用了BG技术。又经过4节课后，对照组几乎完全赶上了（协方差分析p = 0.36；F = 0.9）。总体而言，在任务上花费的时间没有差异。
协作性的BGs提高了组织病理学能力的学习效果。它们激发并促使学生学习。该课程还提高了学生对组织病理学的欣赏程度。对于BGs，数字显微镜比传统的模拟显微镜更适用。BGs在分析显微图像方面的应用应在更大的队列中进行推广和研究。
