Division of Hematology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA.
Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Department of Medical Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, USA.
Clin Teach. 2021 Jun;18(3):290-294. doi: 10.1111/tct.13332. Epub 2021 Feb 4.
Team-based learning (TBL) is associated with improved end-of-course exam performance, but the impact on long-term retention is unknown. We compared the impact of three teaching methods: traditional case-based small group discussion (TSG), TBL or no small group reinforcement on short-term understanding and long-term retention after a haematology course.
Knowledge assessments were conducted prior to, immediately after and 14 months after course completion. Several topics covered by TSG were switched to TBL and could be directly compared.
We recruited 24% of eligible students (n = 70). Of these, 48 completed the final assessment (69% retention). Pre-course, participants scored 31% correctly, which increased to 78% post-course with significant differences: TBL 87%; TSG 78%; no small group 76% (p < 0.01 for both comparisons). At long-term follow-up, the effect of the teaching method was no longer significant: TBL 75%; TSG 67% (p = 0.14); no small group 70% (p = 0.36). When restricted to topics converted from TSG to TBL, the long-term benefit was not shown: TSG 59%; TBL 54% (p = 0.47).
We confirm increased understanding gained by using TBL, but this did not lead to better long-term retention. Improved scores on short-term testing has value for student well-being and competitiveness for residency application. TBL may still be of long-term benefit through modelling team decision making and self-directed learning that are core features of how clinical medicine is practiced. However, our findings argue against justifying the adoption of TBL on the basis of superior long-term retention.
团队学习(TBL)与提高课程结束考试成绩相关,但对长期保留率的影响尚不清楚。我们比较了三种教学方法的影响:传统的基于案例的小组讨论(TSG)、TBL 或无小组强化,在血液病学课程结束后比较短期理解和长期保留率。
在课程结束前、结束后立即和 14 个月进行知识评估。TSG 涵盖的几个主题被切换到 TBL,可以直接比较。
我们招募了合格学生的 24%(n=70)。其中,48 人完成了最终评估(保留率为 69%)。课前,参与者的正确率为 31%,课后增加到 78%,差异显著:TBL 87%;TSG 78%;无小组 76%(两者比较均 p<0.01)。长期随访时,教学方法的效果不再显著:TBL 75%;TSG 67%(p=0.14);无小组 70%(p=0.36)。当仅限于从 TSG 转换为 TBL 的主题时,没有显示出长期益处:TSG 59%;TBL 54%(p=0.47)。
我们证实了使用 TBL 获得的理解能力提高,但这并没有导致更好的长期保留率。短期测试成绩的提高对学生的幸福感和住院医师申请的竞争力具有价值。通过模拟团队决策制定和自我指导学习,TBL 可能仍然具有长期益处,这是临床医学实践的核心特征。然而,我们的发现反对仅仅基于长期保留率的优势来证明采用 TBL 的合理性。