Cargando…
Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology
BACKGROUND: In medical physiology, educators and students face a serious challenge termed misconceptions. Misconceptions are incorrect ideas that do not match current scientific views. Accordingly, they have shown to hamper teaching and learning of physiological concepts. Conceptual Change Theory fo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7409498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32758215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02166-6 |
_version_ | 1783568075319148544 |
---|---|
author | Versteeg, M. van Loon, M. H. Wijnen-Meijer, M. Steendijk, P. |
author_facet | Versteeg, M. van Loon, M. H. Wijnen-Meijer, M. Steendijk, P. |
author_sort | Versteeg, M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In medical physiology, educators and students face a serious challenge termed misconceptions. Misconceptions are incorrect ideas that do not match current scientific views. Accordingly, they have shown to hamper teaching and learning of physiological concepts. Conceptual Change Theory forms the basis of new teaching and learning practices that may alleviate misconceptions and facilitate critical thinking skills that are essential in becoming knowledgeable, self-regulated health professionals. In this study, we examined if such an intervention named refutation texts, could enhance medical students’ cognition and metacognition. METHODS: First-year medical students (N = 161) performed a pre-test and post-test on cardiovascular physiology concepts, including a self-perceived confidence rating. In between, students read either a standard text with an explanation of the correct answer, or a refutation text which additionally refuted related misconceptions. RESULTS: In both groups, average performance scores (refutation: + 22.5%, standard: + 22.8%) and overall confidence ratings (refutation: Δ0.42 out of 5, standard: Δ0.35 out of 5) increased significantly (all p < .001), but a significant effect of the specific refutation element was not found. Initially incorrect answers were corrected less frequently in cases of high confidence (35.8%) than low confidence (61.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that refutation texts significantly increased students’ knowledge, however, the refutation element did not have a significant additional effect. Furthermore, high confidence in incorrect answers negatively affected the likelihood of correction. These findings provide implications for teaching practices on concept learning, by showing that educators should take into account the key role of metacognition, and the nature of misconceptions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7409498 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74094982020-08-07 Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology Versteeg, M. van Loon, M. H. Wijnen-Meijer, M. Steendijk, P. BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: In medical physiology, educators and students face a serious challenge termed misconceptions. Misconceptions are incorrect ideas that do not match current scientific views. Accordingly, they have shown to hamper teaching and learning of physiological concepts. Conceptual Change Theory forms the basis of new teaching and learning practices that may alleviate misconceptions and facilitate critical thinking skills that are essential in becoming knowledgeable, self-regulated health professionals. In this study, we examined if such an intervention named refutation texts, could enhance medical students’ cognition and metacognition. METHODS: First-year medical students (N = 161) performed a pre-test and post-test on cardiovascular physiology concepts, including a self-perceived confidence rating. In between, students read either a standard text with an explanation of the correct answer, or a refutation text which additionally refuted related misconceptions. RESULTS: In both groups, average performance scores (refutation: + 22.5%, standard: + 22.8%) and overall confidence ratings (refutation: Δ0.42 out of 5, standard: Δ0.35 out of 5) increased significantly (all p < .001), but a significant effect of the specific refutation element was not found. Initially incorrect answers were corrected less frequently in cases of high confidence (35.8%) than low confidence (61.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that refutation texts significantly increased students’ knowledge, however, the refutation element did not have a significant additional effect. Furthermore, high confidence in incorrect answers negatively affected the likelihood of correction. These findings provide implications for teaching practices on concept learning, by showing that educators should take into account the key role of metacognition, and the nature of misconceptions. BioMed Central 2020-08-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7409498/ /pubmed/32758215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02166-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Versteeg, M. van Loon, M. H. Wijnen-Meijer, M. Steendijk, P. Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title | Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title_full | Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title_fullStr | Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title_full_unstemmed | Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title_short | Refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
title_sort | refuting misconceptions in medical physiology |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7409498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32758215 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02166-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT versteegm refutingmisconceptionsinmedicalphysiology AT vanloonmh refutingmisconceptionsinmedicalphysiology AT wijnenmeijerm refutingmisconceptionsinmedicalphysiology AT steendijkp refutingmisconceptionsinmedicalphysiology |