Cargando…

A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students

BACKGROUND: Despite the advantages of using active learning strategies in nursing education, researchers have rarely investigated how such pedagogic approaches can be used to assess students or how interactive examinations can be modified depending on circumstances of practice (e.g., in online educa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahlstrom, Linda, Holmberg, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8033549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33836729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00575-6
_version_ 1783676427360534528
author Ahlstrom, Linda
Holmberg, Christopher
author_facet Ahlstrom, Linda
Holmberg, Christopher
author_sort Ahlstrom, Linda
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite the advantages of using active learning strategies in nursing education, researchers have rarely investigated how such pedagogic approaches can be used to assess students or how interactive examinations can be modified depending on circumstances of practice (e.g., in online education). AIMS: The aim was to compare three interactive examination designs, all based on active learning pedagogy, in terms of nursing students’ engagement and preparedness, their learning achievement, and instructional aspects. METHODS: A comparative research design was used including final-year undergraduate nursing students. All students were enrolled in a quality improvement course at a metropolitan university in Sweden. In this comparative study to evaluate three course layouts, participants (Cohort 1, n = 89; Cohort 2, n = 97; Cohort 3, n = 60) completed different examinations assessing the same course content and learning objectives, after which they evaluated the examinations on a questionnaire in numerical and free-text responses. Chi-squared tests were conducted to compare background variables between the cohorts and Kruskal–Wallis H tests to assess numerical differences in experiences between cohorts. Following the guidelines of the Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS), a sequential mixed-methods analysis was performed on the quantitative findings, and the qualitative findings were used complementary to support the interpretation of the quantitative results. RESULTS: The 246 students who completed the questionnaire generally appreciated the interactive examination in active learning classrooms. Among significant differences in the results, Cohort 2 (e.g., conducted the examination on campus) scored highest for overall positive experience and engagement, whereas Cohort 3 (e.g., conducted the examination online) scored the lowest. Students in Cohort 3 generally commended the online examination’s chat function available for use during the examination. CONCLUSIONS: Interactive examinations for nursing students succeed when they are campus-based, focus on student preparation, and provide the necessary time to be completed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00575-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8033549
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80335492021-04-09 A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students Ahlstrom, Linda Holmberg, Christopher BMC Nurs Research Article BACKGROUND: Despite the advantages of using active learning strategies in nursing education, researchers have rarely investigated how such pedagogic approaches can be used to assess students or how interactive examinations can be modified depending on circumstances of practice (e.g., in online education). AIMS: The aim was to compare three interactive examination designs, all based on active learning pedagogy, in terms of nursing students’ engagement and preparedness, their learning achievement, and instructional aspects. METHODS: A comparative research design was used including final-year undergraduate nursing students. All students were enrolled in a quality improvement course at a metropolitan university in Sweden. In this comparative study to evaluate three course layouts, participants (Cohort 1, n = 89; Cohort 2, n = 97; Cohort 3, n = 60) completed different examinations assessing the same course content and learning objectives, after which they evaluated the examinations on a questionnaire in numerical and free-text responses. Chi-squared tests were conducted to compare background variables between the cohorts and Kruskal–Wallis H tests to assess numerical differences in experiences between cohorts. Following the guidelines of the Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS), a sequential mixed-methods analysis was performed on the quantitative findings, and the qualitative findings were used complementary to support the interpretation of the quantitative results. RESULTS: The 246 students who completed the questionnaire generally appreciated the interactive examination in active learning classrooms. Among significant differences in the results, Cohort 2 (e.g., conducted the examination on campus) scored highest for overall positive experience and engagement, whereas Cohort 3 (e.g., conducted the examination online) scored the lowest. Students in Cohort 3 generally commended the online examination’s chat function available for use during the examination. CONCLUSIONS: Interactive examinations for nursing students succeed when they are campus-based, focus on student preparation, and provide the necessary time to be completed. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12912-021-00575-6. BioMed Central 2021-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8033549/ /pubmed/33836729 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00575-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://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
Ahlstrom, Linda
Holmberg, Christopher
A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title_full A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title_fullStr A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title_short A comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
title_sort comparison of three interactive examination designs in active learning classrooms for nursing students
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8033549/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33836729
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12912-021-00575-6
work_keys_str_mv AT ahlstromlinda acomparisonofthreeinteractiveexaminationdesignsinactivelearningclassroomsfornursingstudents
AT holmbergchristopher acomparisonofthreeinteractiveexaminationdesignsinactivelearningclassroomsfornursingstudents
AT ahlstromlinda comparisonofthreeinteractiveexaminationdesignsinactivelearningclassroomsfornursingstudents
AT holmbergchristopher comparisonofthreeinteractiveexaminationdesignsinactivelearningclassroomsfornursingstudents