Cargando…
A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic
BACKGROUND: Educational pedagogies were modified during the COVID-19 pandemic to minimise interruption to teaching. One approach has been the distance learning problem-based learning (PBL) tutorial utilising the online peer-to-peer platform. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of st...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7928185/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33658015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1 |
_version_ | 1783659810669985792 |
---|---|
author | Foo, Chi-chung Cheung, Billy Chu, Kent-man |
author_facet | Foo, Chi-chung Cheung, Billy Chu, Kent-man |
author_sort | Foo, Chi-chung |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Educational pedagogies were modified during the COVID-19 pandemic to minimise interruption to teaching. One approach has been the distance learning problem-based learning (PBL) tutorial utilising the online peer-to-peer platform. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of students using distance learning PBL tutorials using with that of students utilising the conventional face-to-face approach. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a single academic institution. We compared two groups of fourth-year medical students from the same class: one group used distance learning (DL); the other, the face-to-face (FF) method. We used students’ baseline performance at the preceding block for one-to-one propensity score matching. Students utilising the PBL tutorial were given grades by their tutors according to a standardised scoring system encompassing five key areas (score range: 0–10). The main outcome was a student’s total score (i.e., the sum of the scores from the five key areas, ranging from 0 to 50). RESULT: We matched 62 students in each group. With four tutorials, there were 490 observations, with 245 in each group. The mean total score for the DL group was 37.5 ± 4.6, which was significantly lower than that of the FF group (39.0 ± 4.4, p < 0.001). We noted that students in the DL group had a significantly lower scores for all five areas of proficiency: participation, communication, preparation, critical thinking and group skills. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study revealed that the performance of students utilising the DL PBL tutorials was lower than that of students participating in the conventional FF approach. Further studies are needed to ascertain the underlying cause. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7928185 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79281852021-03-04 A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic Foo, Chi-chung Cheung, Billy Chu, Kent-man BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Educational pedagogies were modified during the COVID-19 pandemic to minimise interruption to teaching. One approach has been the distance learning problem-based learning (PBL) tutorial utilising the online peer-to-peer platform. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of students using distance learning PBL tutorials using with that of students utilising the conventional face-to-face approach. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted in a single academic institution. We compared two groups of fourth-year medical students from the same class: one group used distance learning (DL); the other, the face-to-face (FF) method. We used students’ baseline performance at the preceding block for one-to-one propensity score matching. Students utilising the PBL tutorial were given grades by their tutors according to a standardised scoring system encompassing five key areas (score range: 0–10). The main outcome was a student’s total score (i.e., the sum of the scores from the five key areas, ranging from 0 to 50). RESULT: We matched 62 students in each group. With four tutorials, there were 490 observations, with 245 in each group. The mean total score for the DL group was 37.5 ± 4.6, which was significantly lower than that of the FF group (39.0 ± 4.4, p < 0.001). We noted that students in the DL group had a significantly lower scores for all five areas of proficiency: participation, communication, preparation, critical thinking and group skills. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study revealed that the performance of students utilising the DL PBL tutorials was lower than that of students participating in the conventional FF approach. Further studies are needed to ascertain the underlying cause. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1. BioMed Central 2021-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7928185/ /pubmed/33658015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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 Foo, Chi-chung Cheung, Billy Chu, Kent-man A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title_full | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title_fullStr | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title_short | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic |
title_sort | comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the covid-19 pandemic |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7928185/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33658015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT foochichung acomparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic AT cheungbilly acomparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic AT chukentman acomparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic AT foochichung comparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic AT cheungbilly comparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic AT chukentman comparativestudyregardingdistancelearningandtheconventionalfacetofaceapproachconductedproblembasedlearningtutorialduringthecovid19pandemic |