School of Health Sciences, Örebro University, 701 82, Örebro, Sweden.
Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences (HMV), Linköping University, 581 83, Linköping, Sweden.
BMC Med Educ. 2020 Mar 31;20(1):103. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02018-3.
The tutorial group and its dynamics are a cornerstone of problem-based learning (PBL). The tutor's support varies according to the setting, and it is pertinent to explore group effectiveness in relation to different settings, for example online or campus-based. The PBL groups' effectiveness can partly be assessed in terms of cognitive and motivational aspects, using a self-report tool to measure PBL group effectiveness, the Tutorial Group Effectiveness Instrument (TGEI). This study's aim was to explore tutor participation in variations of online and campus-based tutorial groups in relation to group effectiveness. A secondary aim was to validate a tool for assessing tutorial group effectiveness in a Swedish context.
A cross-sectional study was conducted with advanced-level nursing students studying to become specialised nurses or midwives at a Swedish university. The TGEI was used to measure motivational and cognitive aspects in addition to overall group effectiveness. The instrument's items were translated into Swedish and refined with an expert group and students. The responses were calculated descriptively and compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. A psychometric evaluation was performed using the Mokken scale analysis. The subscale scores were compared between three different tutor settings: the tutor present face-to-face in the room, the tutor present online and the consultant tutor not present in the room and giving support asynchronously.
All the invited students (n = 221) participated in the study. There were no differences in motivational or cognitive aspects between students with or without prior PBL experience, nor between men and women. Higher scores were identified on cognitive aspects (22.6, 24.6 and 21.3; p < 0.001), motivational aspects (26.3, 27 and 24.5; p = 002) and group effectiveness (4.1, 4.3, 3.8, p = 0.02) for the two synchronously tutored groups compared to the asynchronously tutored group. The TGEI subscales showed adequate homogeneity.
The tutor's presence is productive for PBL group effectiveness. However, the tutor need not be in the actual room but can provide support in online settings as long as the tutoring is synchronous.
专题讨论小组及其动态是基于问题的学习（PBL）的基石。导师的支持因设置而异，因此探讨不同设置下的小组有效性是很重要的，例如在线或校园设置。可以使用自我报告工具来衡量 PBL 小组的有效性，即专题讨论小组有效性工具（TGEI），从认知和动机方面部分评估小组的有效性。本研究旨在探讨在线和校园专题讨论小组中导师的参与与小组有效性的关系。次要目的是在瑞典背景下验证评估专题讨论小组有效性的工具。
这是一项在瑞典一所大学学习成为专业护士或助产士的高级护理学生的横断面研究。除了总体小组有效性外，还使用 TGEI 来衡量动机和认知方面。该工具的项目被翻译成瑞典语，并由专家组和学生进行了改进。使用 Mann-Whitney U 和 Kruskal-Wallis 检验对反应进行描述性比较，并在组间进行比较。使用莫肯量表分析进行心理测量评估。比较了三种不同导师设置下的子量表分数：导师在房间内面对面、导师在线和顾问导师不在房间内但提供异步支持。
所有受邀的学生（n=221）都参与了研究。有或没有先前 PBL 经验的学生以及男性和女性之间在动机或认知方面没有差异。在认知方面（22.6、24.6 和 21.3；p<0.001）、动机方面（26.3、27 和 24.5；p=0.02）和小组有效性（4.1、4.3、3.8，p=0.02）方面，两个同步辅导组的得分均高于异步辅导组。TGEI 子量表表现出足够的同质性。
导师的存在对 PBL 小组的有效性是有成效的。然而，导师不需要在实际房间内，只要辅导是同步的，就可以在在线环境中提供支持。
