File Download
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85101982169
- PMID: 33658015
- WOS: WOS:000625127800001
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: 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 |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Problem-based learning PBL Distance learning Online education |
Issue Date | 2021 |
Publisher | BioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmededuc/ |
Citation | BMC Medical Education, 2021, v. 21 n. 1, p. article no. 141 How to Cite? |
Abstract | 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. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/298723 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 2.7 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.935 |
PubMed Central ID | |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Foo, CC | - |
dc.contributor.author | Cheung, B | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chu, KM | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-04-12T03:02:30Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-04-12T03:02:30Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | BMC Medical Education, 2021, v. 21 n. 1, p. article no. 141 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1472-6920 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/298723 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 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. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | BioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.biomedcentral.com/bmcmededuc/ | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | BMC Medical Education | - |
dc.rights | BMC Medical Education. Copyright © BioMed Central Ltd. | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | Problem-based learning | - |
dc.subject | PBL | - |
dc.subject | Distance learning | - |
dc.subject | Online education | - |
dc.title | A comparative study regarding distance learning and the conventional face-to-face approach conducted problem-based learning tutorial during the COVID-19 pandemic | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.email | Foo, CC: ccfoo@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.email | Chu, KM: chukm@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Foo, CC=rp01899 | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Chu, KM=rp00435 | - |
dc.description.nature | published_or_final_version | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1186/s12909-021-02575-1 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 33658015 | - |
dc.identifier.pmcid | PMC7928185 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85101982169 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 322081 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 21 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | article no. 141 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | article no. 141 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000625127800001 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United Kingdom | - |