Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany.
Int J Med Educ. 2021 Jun 29;12:130-135. doi: 10.5116/ijme.60c0.981e.
To assess the effects of simulation-based education on medical students' motivation and to compare these effects with the motivational effects of a classical teaching approach (seminar).
In this cross-sectional study, motivational qualities of 164 3rd year medical students, who participated in four mandatory simulation-based training and two seminars of the department of anaesthesiology, were assessed. Comparative analysis was made to determine differences and changes of motivation towards participating in each teaching unit and each teaching format, using a one-way analysis of variance and unpaired t-tests.
The different motivational qualities, as well as the computed levels of autonomous and controlled motivation of students towards participating in each of the six teaching units and each teaching format did not differ significantly (F = 0.66, p = 0.657; F = 0.29, p = 0.920; (t = - 0.72, p = 0.471; t = -0.17, p = 0.868). Students` motivation, particularly autonomous motivation, did not enhance after participating in the first SBME, (t = 1.035, p = 0.301), after participating in the second SBME, (t = -0.055, p = 0.956), or after participating in the third training (t = -0.881, p = 0.379).
Simulation-based medical education provides a valuable teaching approach but, in this study, this teaching approach did not enhance nor stimulate student motivation. Therefore, simulation-based medical education equals classical teaching approaches regarding student motivation. Further investigations are needed to identify how simulation-based medical education could enhance medical students' motivation.
评估基于模拟的教育对医学生动机的影响,并将这些影响与经典教学方法(研讨会)的动机效果进行比较。
在这项横断面研究中,评估了 164 名 3 年级医学生的动机素质,他们参加了麻醉学系的四项强制性基于模拟的培训和两次研讨会。使用单向方差分析和非配对 t 检验进行比较分析,以确定对参加每个教学单元和每个教学形式的动机的差异和变化。
不同的动机素质,以及学生对参加每个教学单元和每个教学形式的动机的自主和控制动机水平没有显著差异(F = 0.66,p = 0.657;F = 0.29,p = 0.920;(t = -0.72,p = 0.471;t = -0.17,p = 0.868)。学生的动机,特别是自主动机,在参加第一次 SBME 后并没有提高(t = 1.035,p = 0.301),在参加第二次 SBME 后也没有提高(t = -0.055,p = 0.956),或者在参加第三次培训后也没有提高(t = -0.881,p = 0.379)。
基于模拟的医学教育提供了一种有价值的教学方法,但在这项研究中,这种教学方法既没有增强也没有激发学生的动机。因此,基于模拟的医学教育在学生动机方面等同于经典教学方法。需要进一步的研究来确定如何提高基于模拟的医学教育对医学生的动机。