Cargando…

Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a learning model based on workstation activities

BACKGROUND: Moving towards a horizontal and vertical integrated curriculum, Work-Station Learning Activities (WSLA) were designed and implemented as a new learning instrument. Here, we aim to evaluate whether and how this specific learning model affects academic performance. To better understand how...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sánchez, Judit, Andreu-Vázquez, Cristina, Lesmes, Marta, García-Lecea, Marta, Rodríguez-Martín, Iván, Tutor, Antonio S., Gal, Beatriz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7406050/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32756582
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236940
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Moving towards a horizontal and vertical integrated curriculum, Work-Station Learning Activities (WSLA) were designed and implemented as a new learning instrument. Here, we aim to evaluate whether and how this specific learning model affects academic performance. To better understand how it is received by medical students, a mixed methods research study was conducted. METHODS: In the quantitative strand, two cohorts of first year students were compared: academic year 2015–2016 n = 320 with no exposure to WSLA, and academic year 2016–2017 n = 336 with WSLA. Learning objectives at different levels of Bloom’s taxonomy were identified and performance evaluated from multiple-choice questions. In the qualitative strand, a total of six students were purposely selected considering academic performance and motivation, and submitted to semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Performance at both cohorts for learning objectives at lower levels of Bloom’s taxonomy was similar (38.8 vs. 39.0%; p = 0.955). In contrast, students in the WSLA group outperformed significantly those not exposed for learning objectives involving upper levels (68.5 vs. 54.2%; p <0.001). A multivariate analysis confirmed that the probability of mastering the second (more complex) objective is 1.64 times higher in students with WSLA methodology (OR 95% CI, 1.15–2.34; p = 0.007) than with traditional methodology. In the interviews, students perceived the clinical scenario of WSLA as a motivator and recognized this methodology as a more constructive framework for understanding of complicated concepts. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, our mixed methods research supports WSLA as a strategy that promotes deep learning and has a positive impact on academic performance for learning objectives involving higher order thinking skills in medical curricula.