Al-Karadsheh Omar, Abutayyem Huda, Saidi Ayeh, Shqaidef Abdelrahman
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Oral Medicine, and Periodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan.
Department of Clinical Sciences, Center of Medical and Bio-Allied Health Sciences Research, College of Dentistry, Ajman University, Ajman, UAE.
BMC Med Educ. 2025 Apr 18;25(1):573. doi: 10.1186/s12909-025-07156-0.
Traditional lecture-based learning has been the cornerstone of dental education; however, active learning strategies such as flipped classrooms are gaining popularity for their potential to enhance student engagement and performance. This study evaluated the effectiveness of three teaching methods-traditional live lectures, flipped video classrooms, and interactive flipped classrooms-on improving academic performance and student perceptions among fourth-year dental students.
This study employed a stratified randomization design involving 156 fourth-year dental students using a single lecture in an undergraduate orthodontics course. The students were first grouped into four categories based on their Grade Point Average (GPA): Excellent, Very Good, Good, and Satisfactory. From these groups, students were randomly drawn and placed into one of three intervention groups: live lecture, flipped classroom with video lectures, and flipped classroom with interactive video lectures. Pre- and post-intervention assessments evaluated knowledge improvement, while objective structured assessments measured academic performance. Student perceptions were gauged using validated Likert-scale questionnaires. Paired t-tests assessed within-group differences, and ANOVA compared effectiveness across teaching methods. Pearson's correlation analysis examined the relationship between academic performance and GPA of the students.
All three teaching methods showed significant improvements in post-intervention scores (p < 0.001). The Live Lecture Group had the greatest mean improvement (27.69), followed by the Flipped Video Lecture Group (27.30) and the Flipped Interactive Lecture Group (27.11). However, ANOVA revealed no statistically significant differences between the groups (F (2, 153) = 0.007, p = 0.993). Female students performed better in the live lecture setting (32.60 ± 25.08) compared to males (23.79 ± 21.44). Students with lower GPAs benefited most from the interactive flipped classroom, Pearson's correlation indicated a strong positive association between GPA and post-intervention scores (r = 0.708, p < 0.001). Student satisfaction was highest in the interactive flipped classroom, with 97.7% rating the experience as "Excellent" or "Very Good."
All three teaching methods led to significant improvement in post-test scores. While students reported higher engagement and satisfaction in flipped and interactive flipped lectures, the live lecture method was also effective for knowledge retention. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring educational strategies to diverse student needs in dental education. Educators should consider a blended model that integrates flipped and traditional strategies selectively, balancing feasibility with student needs, as developing multiple formats can be time-intensive with only modest differences in outcomes.
Not applicable.
传统的基于讲座的学习一直是牙科教育的基石;然而,诸如翻转课堂等主动学习策略因其在提高学生参与度和表现方面的潜力而越来越受欢迎。本研究评估了三种教学方法——传统现场讲座、翻转视频课堂和交互式翻转课堂——对提高四年级牙科学生学业成绩和学生认知的有效性。
本研究采用分层随机化设计,涉及156名四年级牙科学生,在本科正畸课程中使用单一讲座。学生首先根据他们的平均绩点(GPA)分为四类:优秀、非常好、良好和满意。从这些组中,随机抽取学生并将其分为三个干预组之一:现场讲座、带视频讲座的翻转课堂和带交互式视频讲座的翻转课堂。干预前和干预后的评估评估知识的提高,而客观结构化评估测量学业成绩。使用经过验证的李克特量表问卷来衡量学生的认知。配对t检验评估组内差异,方差分析比较不同教学方法的有效性。皮尔逊相关分析检验了学生学业成绩与GPA之间的关系。
所有三种教学方法在干预后的分数上都有显著提高(p < 0.001)。现场讲座组的平均提高最大(27.69),其次是翻转视频讲座组(27.30)和翻转交互式讲座组(27.11)。然而,方差分析显示各组之间没有统计学上的显著差异(F(2, 153) = 0.007,p = 0.993)。与男性(23.79 ± 21.44)相比,女性学生在现场讲座环境中的表现更好(32.60 ± 25.08)。GPA较低的学生从交互式翻转课堂中受益最大,皮尔逊相关表明GPA与干预后分数之间存在强正相关(r = 0.708,p < 0.001)。学生满意度在交互式翻转课堂中最高,97.7%的学生将体验评为“优秀”或“非常好”。
所有三种教学方法都使测试后分数有显著提高。虽然学生报告在翻转和交互式翻转讲座中的参与度和满意度更高,但现场讲座方法在知识保留方面也很有效。这些发现凸显了在牙科教育中根据不同学生需求定制教育策略的重要性。教育工作者应考虑一种混合模式,有选择地整合翻转和传统策略,在可行性与学生需求之间取得平衡,因为开发多种形式可能耗时且结果差异不大。
不适用。