Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Psychotic Disorders, Brain Health Institute, National Center for Mental Disorders, Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Adv Physiol Educ. 2024 Sep 1;48(3):446-454. doi: 10.1152/advan.00196.2023. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
This study aimed to compare the impact of the partially flipped physiology classroom (PFC) and the traditional lecture-based classroom (TLC) on students' learning approaches. The study was conducted over 5 mo at Xiangya School of Medicine from February to July 2022 and comprised 71 students majoring in clinical medicine. The experimental group ( = 32) received PFC teaching, whereas the control group ( = 39) received TLC. The Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) was used to assess the impact of different teaching methods on students' learning approaches. After the PFC, students got significantly higher scores on deep learning approach ( = -3.133, < 0.05). Conversely, after the TLC students showed significantly higher scores on surface learning approach ( = -2.259, < 0.05). After the course, students in the PFC group scored significantly higher in deep learning strategy than those in the TLC group ( = -2.196, < 0.05). The PFC model had a positive impact on deep learning motive and strategy, leading to an improvement in the deep approach, which is beneficial for the long-term development of students. In contrast, the TLC model only improved the surface learning approach. The study implies that educators should consider implementing PFC to enhance students' learning approaches. In this article, we compare the impact of the partially flipped classroom (PFC) and the traditional lecture classroom (TLC) in a physiology course on medical students' learning approaches. We found that the PFC benefited students by significantly enhancing their deep learning motive, strategy, and approach, which was good for them. However, the TLC model only improved the surface learning motive and approach.
本研究旨在比较部分翻转课堂（PFC）和传统讲授课堂（TLC）对学生学习方法的影响。该研究于 2022 年 2 月至 7 月在湘雅医学院进行，历时 5 个月，共有 71 名临床医学专业学生参加。实验组（n=32）接受 PFC 教学，对照组（n=39）接受 TLC。采用修订后的双因素学习过程问卷（R-SPQ-2F）评估不同教学方法对学生学习方法的影响。在 PFC 之后，学生在深度学习方法上的得分显著提高（ = -3.133，<0.05）。相反，在 TLC 之后，学生在浅层学习方法上的得分显著提高（ = -2.259，<0.05）。课程结束后，PFC 组学生在深度学习策略上的得分显著高于 TLC 组（ = -2.196，<0.05）。PFC 模式对深度学习动机和策略有积极影响，导致深度学习方法的改善，这有利于学生的长期发展。相比之下，TLC 模式仅提高了浅层学习方法。该研究表明，教育者应考虑实施 PFC 以增强学生的学习方法。在本文中，我们比较了生理学课程中部分翻转课堂（PFC）和传统讲授课堂（TLC）对医学生学习方法的影响。我们发现，PFC 显著增强了学生的深度学习动机、策略和方法，这对他们有益。然而，TLC 模式仅提高了浅层学习动机和方法。
