Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230601, Anhui Province, China.
Department of Economics and Trade, School of Economics and Management, Hefei University, No. 99 Jinxiu Avenue, Hefei, 230601, Anhui Province, China.
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Aug 9;24(1):860. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05868-3.
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the BOPPPS model (bridge-in, learning objective, pre-test, participatory learning, post-test, and summary) in otolaryngology education for five-year undergraduate students.
A non-randomized controlled trial was conducted with 167 five-year undergraduate students from Anhui Medical University, who were allocated to an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received instruction using the BOPPPS model, while the control group underwent traditional teaching methods. The evaluation of the teaching effectiveness was performed through an anonymous questionnaire based on the course evaluation questionnaire. Students' perspectives and self-evaluations were quantified using a five-point Likert scale. Furthermore, students' comprehension of the course content was measured through a comprehensive final examination at the end of the semester.
Students in the experimental group reported significantly higher scores in various competencies compared to the control group: planning work (4.27 ± 0.676 vs. 4.03 ± 0.581, P < 0.05), problem-solving skills (4.31 ± 0.624 vs. 4.03 ± 0.559, P < 0.01), teamwork abilities (4.19 ± 0.704 vs. 3.87 ± 0.758, P < 0.05), and analytical skills (4.31 ± 0.719 vs. 4.05 ± 0.622, P < 0.05). They also reported higher motivation for learning (4.48 ± 0.618 vs. 4.09 ± 0.582, P < 0.01). Additionally, students in the experimental group felt more confident tackling unfamiliar problems (4.21 ± 0.743 vs. 3.95 ± 0.636, P < 0.05), had a clearer understanding of teachers' expectations (4.31 ± 0.552 vs. 4.08 ± 0.555, P < 0.05), and perceived more effort from teachers to understand their difficulties (4.42 ± 0.577 vs. 4.13 ± 0.59, P < 0.01). They emphasized comprehension over memorization (3.65 ± 1.176 vs. 3.18 ± 1.065, P < 0.05) and received more helpful feedback (4.40 ± 0.574 vs. 4.08 ± 0.585, P < 0.01). Lecturers were rated better at explaining concepts (4.42 ± 0.539 vs. 4.08 ± 0.619, P < 0.01) and making subjects interesting (4.50 ± 0.546 vs. 4.08 ± 0.632, P < 0.01). Overall, the experimental group expressed higher course satisfaction (4.56 ± 0.542 vs. 4.34 ± 0.641, P < 0.05). In terms of examination performance, the experimental group scored higher on the final examination (87.7 ± 6.7 vs. 84.0 ± 7.7, P < 0.01) and in noun-interpretation (27.0 ± 1.6 vs. 26.1 ± 2.4, P < 0.01).
The BOPPPS model emerged as an effective and innovative teaching method, particularly in enhancing students' competencies in otolaryngology education. Based on the findings of this study, educators and institutions were encouraged to consider incorporating the BOPPPS model into their curricula to enhance the learning experiences and outcomes of students.
本研究旨在评估 BOPPPS 模型(衔接、学习目标、前测、参与式学习、后测和总结)在五年制本科医学生耳鼻喉科教育中的有效性。
采用非随机对照试验,对安徽医科大学的 167 名五年制本科学生进行分组,实验组采用 BOPPPS 模型进行教学,对照组采用传统教学方法。通过课程评估问卷的匿名问卷调查评估教学效果。学生的观点和自我评价采用 5 分李克特量表进行量化。此外,学生的课程内容理解通过学期末的综合期末考试进行衡量。
实验组学生在以下各项能力方面的得分显著高于对照组:工作计划能力(4.27±0.676 比 4.03±0.581,P<0.05)、解决问题的能力(4.31±0.624 比 4.03±0.559,P<0.01)、团队合作能力(4.19±0.704 比 3.87±0.758,P<0.05)和分析能力(4.31±0.719 比 4.05±0.622,P<0.05)。他们也报告了更高的学习动机(4.48±0.618 比 4.09±0.582,P<0.01)。此外,实验组学生在处理不熟悉的问题时更有信心(4.21±0.743 比 3.95±0.636,P<0.05),对教师的期望有更清晰的理解(4.31±0.552 比 4.08±0.555,P<0.05),并认为教师更努力地理解他们的困难(4.42±0.577 比 4.13±0.59,P<0.01)。他们强调理解而非记忆(3.65±1.176 比 3.18±1.065,P<0.05),并获得了更多的有益反馈(4.40±0.574 比 4.08±0.585,P<0.01)。讲师在解释概念(4.42±0.539 比 4.08±0.619,P<0.01)和使科目有趣(4.50±0.546 比 4.08±0.632,P<0.01)方面的评价更好。总体而言,实验组对课程的满意度更高(4.56±0.542 比 4.34±0.641,P<0.05)。在考试成绩方面,实验组期末考试成绩(87.7±6.7 比 84.0±7.7,P<0.01)和名词解释成绩(27.0±1.6 比 26.1±2.4,P<0.01)更高。
BOPPPS 模型是一种有效的创新教学方法,尤其在提高耳鼻喉科医学生的能力方面。基于本研究的结果,教育工作者和机构鼓励将 BOPPPS 模型纳入其课程,以提高学生的学习体验和成果。