@2024 Afarand., IRAN
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2015;8(4):215-222
ISSN: 2228-5468 Education Strategies in Medical Sciences 2015;8(4):215-222
Comparison of Lecture and Network-Based Educational Methods on Improving the Academic Performance of Students; Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences
ARTICLE INFO
Article Type
Descriptive & Survey StudyAuthors
Zeraati M. (*)Zakipour M. (1)
Aghabararian N. (2)
(*) Educational Sciences Department, Management Faculty, Aeronautical University of Shahid Sattari, Tehran, Iran
(1) Educational Sciences Department, Management Faculty, Aeronautical University of Shahid Sattari, Tehran, Iran
(2) Educational Sciences Department, Human Sciences Faculty, Central Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran
Correspondence
Article History
Received: August 21, 2015Accepted: September 9, 2015
ePublished: September 25, 2015
ABSTRACT
Aims
Continuous virtual (electronic) learning is a method to strengthen the traditional approaches to education, but still there is not lot evidences about the evaluation of this method. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of two virtual (electronic) and traditional (lecture) educational methods on the level of learning of students.
Instrument & Methods In this quasi-experimental study in 2012, 202 undergraduate students of the Department of Public Health of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences who had epidemiology, epidemiology of common diseases, maternal and child health and reproductive health courses in the second semester of 2012 were entered to study by census method. Half of the subjects were presented by lecture and the rest in virtual form and the differences of students’ scores between educational methods were studied. Students’ viewpoint were also assessed via a researcher-made questionnaire. Student's T test and anal
Findings The mean scores of students was not significantly different between two methods (p>0.05). Virtual learning was appropriate in terms of achieving educational goals, content, methods, sequence and type of material and there was no significant relationship between the appropriateness of course content and learning objectives and number of errors in the final exam. Ability of students to work successfully with computer had significant relationships with success in working with e-learning system and computer test scores (p=0.001).
Conclusion Both methods of virtual (electronic) and lecture education have the same impact on the level of learning in students.
Instrument & Methods In this quasi-experimental study in 2012, 202 undergraduate students of the Department of Public Health of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences who had epidemiology, epidemiology of common diseases, maternal and child health and reproductive health courses in the second semester of 2012 were entered to study by census method. Half of the subjects were presented by lecture and the rest in virtual form and the differences of students’ scores between educational methods were studied. Students’ viewpoint were also assessed via a researcher-made questionnaire. Student's T test and anal
Findings The mean scores of students was not significantly different between two methods (p>0.05). Virtual learning was appropriate in terms of achieving educational goals, content, methods, sequence and type of material and there was no significant relationship between the appropriateness of course content and learning objectives and number of errors in the final exam. Ability of students to work successfully with computer had significant relationships with success in working with e-learning system and computer test scores (p=0.001).
Conclusion Both methods of virtual (electronic) and lecture education have the same impact on the level of learning in students.
CITATION LINKS
[1]Jalili A, Abasi M. Information and communication technology in education in other countries. Tehran: Proceedings of the Conference of ICT; 2004.
[2]Zandi S, Abedi D, Changiz T, Yousefi AR, Yamani N, Kabiri P. Electronic learning as a new educational technology and its integration in medical education curricula. Iran J Med Educ. 2004;4(1):61-70. [Persian]
[3]Thurmond VA. Defining interaction and strategies to enhance interactions in Web-based courses. Nurse Educ. 2003;28(5):237-41.
[4]Choi H. A problem-based learning trial on the Internet involving undergraduate nursing students. J Nurse Educ. 2003;42(8):359-63.
[5]Peydaie M. Analysis of the effectiveness of e-learning. Tehran: Allame Tabatabaie University; 2003. [Persian]
[6]Frith KH, Kee CC. The effect of communication on nursing student outcomes in a Web-based course. J Nurs Educ. 2003;42(8):350-8.
[7]Shea P, Pickett A, Sauli C. Increasing sccess to higher education: a study of the diffusion of online teaching among 913 college faculty. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2005;6(2):1-27.
[8]Hewitt-Taylor J. Facilitating distance learning in nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2003;3(1):23-9.
[9]Maleki H. Curriculum (action). 5th edition. Tehran: School Publishing, printing; 2000. p. 296.
[10]Buckley KM. Evaluation of classroom-based, Web-enhanced, and Web-based distance learning nutrition courses for undergraduate nursing. J Nurse Educ. 2003;42(8):367-70.
[11]Olfaghari M, Sarmadi M, Negarandeh R, Zandi B, Ahmadi F. Satisfaction of student and faculty members with implementing Blended-E-Learning. Iran J Nurs Res. 2009;3(11):99-109. [Persian]
[12]Bahadorani M, Yousefy A, Changiz T. The effectiveness of three methods of teaching medline to medical students: Online, face to face and combined educational methods. Iran J Med Educ. 2006;6(2):35-43. [Persian]
[13]Keshavarz L. The role of media in teaching physical education soccer distance learning system. J Harakat. 2003;16(16):25-37. [Persian]
[14]Liaw ST, Gray K. Clinical health informatics education for a 21st Century World. Stud Health Technol Inf. 2010;151:479-91.
[15]Einarson E, Moen A, Kolberg R, Flingtorp G, Linnerud E. Interactive eLearning - a safe place to practice. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;146: 841.
[16]Casimiro L, MacDonald CJ, Thompson TL, Stodel EJ. Grounding theories of W(e)Learn: A framework for online interprofessional education. J Interprof Care. 2009;23(4):390-400.
[17]Gerkin KL, Taylor TH, Weatherby FM. The perception of learning and satisfaction of nurses in the online environment. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2009;25(1):E8-13.
[18]Choules AP. The use of e-learning in medical education: a review of the current situation. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(978):212-26.
[19]Jossif A, Pattichis CS, Kyriakides M, Pitsillides A, Kyriacou E, Dikaiakos M. Selected eHealth applications in Cyprus from the training perspective. Methods Inf Med. 2007;46(1): 84-9.
[20]Zajaczek JE, Götz F, Kupka T, Behrends M, Haubitz B, Donnerstag F, et al. eLearning in education and advanced training in neuroradiology: introduction of a web-based teaching and learning application. Neuroradiology. 2006;48(9): 640-6.
[21]Caporale V, Alessandrini B, Dalla Villa P, Del Papa S. Global perspectives on animal welfare: Europe. Rev Sci Tech. 2005;24(2): 567-77.
[22]Docherty C, Hoy D, Topp H, Trinder K. eLearning techniques supporting problem based learning in clinical simulation. Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(7-8):527-33.
[23]Leed C. Preparing for a software transition: How the VNA of Central Jersey cured its training ailments in record time. Home Healthc Nurse. 2005;23(1):50-2.
[24]Wutoh R, Boren SA, Balas EA. eLearning: a review of Internet-based continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004;24(1):20-30.
[25]Wright KE, Stewart J, Wright VH, Barker S. eLearning: Is there a place in athletic training education? J Athl Train. 2002;37(4 Suppl):S-208-S-212.
[26]Stausberg J, Bilir H, Waydhas C, Ruchholtz S. Guideline validation in multiple trauma care through business process modeling. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2002;90:548-52.
[27]Levesque DR, Kelly G. Meeting the challenge of continuing education with eLearning. Radiol Manage. 2002;24(2):40-3.
[28]Romanov K, Kuusi T. Freeware eLearning Flash-ECG for learning electrocardiography. Med Teach. 2009;31(6):550-2.
[29]Kldiashvili E, Schrader T. Implementation of telepathology in the republic of georgia. Telemed J E Health. 2009;15(5):479-83.
[30]Wright CR. 5 Key barriers to educational technology adoption in the developing world. Educ Technol Debate; April 2014. Available from: http://goo.gl/lJ6Nsx
[2]Zandi S, Abedi D, Changiz T, Yousefi AR, Yamani N, Kabiri P. Electronic learning as a new educational technology and its integration in medical education curricula. Iran J Med Educ. 2004;4(1):61-70. [Persian]
[3]Thurmond VA. Defining interaction and strategies to enhance interactions in Web-based courses. Nurse Educ. 2003;28(5):237-41.
[4]Choi H. A problem-based learning trial on the Internet involving undergraduate nursing students. J Nurse Educ. 2003;42(8):359-63.
[5]Peydaie M. Analysis of the effectiveness of e-learning. Tehran: Allame Tabatabaie University; 2003. [Persian]
[6]Frith KH, Kee CC. The effect of communication on nursing student outcomes in a Web-based course. J Nurs Educ. 2003;42(8):350-8.
[7]Shea P, Pickett A, Sauli C. Increasing sccess to higher education: a study of the diffusion of online teaching among 913 college faculty. Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn. 2005;6(2):1-27.
[8]Hewitt-Taylor J. Facilitating distance learning in nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2003;3(1):23-9.
[9]Maleki H. Curriculum (action). 5th edition. Tehran: School Publishing, printing; 2000. p. 296.
[10]Buckley KM. Evaluation of classroom-based, Web-enhanced, and Web-based distance learning nutrition courses for undergraduate nursing. J Nurse Educ. 2003;42(8):367-70.
[11]Olfaghari M, Sarmadi M, Negarandeh R, Zandi B, Ahmadi F. Satisfaction of student and faculty members with implementing Blended-E-Learning. Iran J Nurs Res. 2009;3(11):99-109. [Persian]
[12]Bahadorani M, Yousefy A, Changiz T. The effectiveness of three methods of teaching medline to medical students: Online, face to face and combined educational methods. Iran J Med Educ. 2006;6(2):35-43. [Persian]
[13]Keshavarz L. The role of media in teaching physical education soccer distance learning system. J Harakat. 2003;16(16):25-37. [Persian]
[14]Liaw ST, Gray K. Clinical health informatics education for a 21st Century World. Stud Health Technol Inf. 2010;151:479-91.
[15]Einarson E, Moen A, Kolberg R, Flingtorp G, Linnerud E. Interactive eLearning - a safe place to practice. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2009;146: 841.
[16]Casimiro L, MacDonald CJ, Thompson TL, Stodel EJ. Grounding theories of W(e)Learn: A framework for online interprofessional education. J Interprof Care. 2009;23(4):390-400.
[17]Gerkin KL, Taylor TH, Weatherby FM. The perception of learning and satisfaction of nurses in the online environment. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2009;25(1):E8-13.
[18]Choules AP. The use of e-learning in medical education: a review of the current situation. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(978):212-26.
[19]Jossif A, Pattichis CS, Kyriakides M, Pitsillides A, Kyriacou E, Dikaiakos M. Selected eHealth applications in Cyprus from the training perspective. Methods Inf Med. 2007;46(1): 84-9.
[20]Zajaczek JE, Götz F, Kupka T, Behrends M, Haubitz B, Donnerstag F, et al. eLearning in education and advanced training in neuroradiology: introduction of a web-based teaching and learning application. Neuroradiology. 2006;48(9): 640-6.
[21]Caporale V, Alessandrini B, Dalla Villa P, Del Papa S. Global perspectives on animal welfare: Europe. Rev Sci Tech. 2005;24(2): 567-77.
[22]Docherty C, Hoy D, Topp H, Trinder K. eLearning techniques supporting problem based learning in clinical simulation. Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(7-8):527-33.
[23]Leed C. Preparing for a software transition: How the VNA of Central Jersey cured its training ailments in record time. Home Healthc Nurse. 2005;23(1):50-2.
[24]Wutoh R, Boren SA, Balas EA. eLearning: a review of Internet-based continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004;24(1):20-30.
[25]Wright KE, Stewart J, Wright VH, Barker S. eLearning: Is there a place in athletic training education? J Athl Train. 2002;37(4 Suppl):S-208-S-212.
[26]Stausberg J, Bilir H, Waydhas C, Ruchholtz S. Guideline validation in multiple trauma care through business process modeling. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2002;90:548-52.
[27]Levesque DR, Kelly G. Meeting the challenge of continuing education with eLearning. Radiol Manage. 2002;24(2):40-3.
[28]Romanov K, Kuusi T. Freeware eLearning Flash-ECG for learning electrocardiography. Med Teach. 2009;31(6):550-2.
[29]Kldiashvili E, Schrader T. Implementation of telepathology in the republic of georgia. Telemed J E Health. 2009;15(5):479-83.
[30]Wright CR. 5 Key barriers to educational technology adoption in the developing world. Educ Technol Debate; April 2014. Available from: http://goo.gl/lJ6Nsx