Tue, Jul 1, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 15, Issue 48 (2023)
JMED 2023, 15(48): 38-43 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ali Z, Khan R, bin Gulshad S M, Mushtaq S, Waqas S, Farooq R. Lectures or small group discussions: What do undergraduate medical students perceive and prefer. JMED 2023; 15 (48) :38-43
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1777-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-1777-en.html
Zaima Ali *1 
, Rameen Khan2 , Saad Muhammad Bin Gulshad2 , Shozib Mushtaq2 , Shahana Waqas2 , Rimsha Farooq2
, Rameen Khan2 , Saad Muhammad Bin Gulshad2 , Shozib Mushtaq2 , Shahana Waqas2 , Rimsha Farooq2
1- Department of Physiology, Lahore Medical and Dental College, Lahore, Pakistan , zaima.ali@hotmail.com
2- Lahore Medical and Dental College, Lahore, Pakistan
2- Lahore Medical and Dental College, Lahore, Pakistan
Abstract: (1867 Views)
Background & Objective: Physiology is the knowledge of normal functions of the body. Although different teaching methods are used to teach the subject including didactic lectures, small group discussions, tutorials, etc., students’ perception of these methods is important. The study was designed to assess the perceptions of medical students about lectures and small group discussion (SGD) and to check the preference of high achievers about the two methods.
Materials & Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at a medical college from April till July 2022. After approval from the Institutional review board, students of first- and second-year Bachelor of Medicine, and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) participated with consent. Data was collected with a structured questionnaire and described as frequency and percentages. To check the association between categorical variables chi-square test was applied.
Results: A total number of 268 students participated including 148 females and 120 males. 65.3% of the students preferred SGDs over lectures. The Chi-square test revealed a significant association between high performance and SGDs regarding accountability in the session, communication skills, presentation skills, and analytical thinking as well as problem-solving (p-value < 0.05). Overall, 75% of the high achievers preferred SGDs while 25% were in favor of lectures. There was a significant association between the high achievers and SGDs (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Medical students preferred SGDs over lectures as SGDs improved their communication, analytical and reasoning skills. SGDs are associated with high performance regarding communication skills, presentation skills, and analytical thinking as well as problem-solving.
Results: A total number of 268 students participated including 148 females and 120 males. 65.3% of the students preferred SGDs over lectures. The Chi-square test revealed a significant association between high performance and SGDs regarding accountability in the session, communication skills, presentation skills, and analytical thinking as well as problem-solving (p-value < 0.05). Overall, 75% of the high achievers preferred SGDs while 25% were in favor of lectures. There was a significant association between the high achievers and SGDs (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Medical students preferred SGDs over lectures as SGDs improved their communication, analytical and reasoning skills. SGDs are associated with high performance regarding communication skills, presentation skills, and analytical thinking as well as problem-solving.
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2022/11/18 | Accepted: 2022/12/30 | Published: 2023/02/28
Received: 2022/11/18 | Accepted: 2022/12/30 | Published: 2023/02/28
References
1. Yathish T, Sudarshan C, Sudhanva S. Perceptions of medical students and physicians about the role and scope of physiology. National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2020;10(6). [DOI]
2. Ferguson MJ, Bargh JA. How social perception can automatically influence behavior. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2004;8(1):33-39. [DOI]
3. Prideaux D. ABC of learning and teaching in medicine. BMJ 2003;326(1):268-70. [DOI]
4. Belfield C, Thomas H, Bullock A, Eynon R, Wall D. Measuring effectiveness for best evidence medical education: a discussion. Medical Teacher. 2001;23(2):164-70. [DOI]
5. Stronge JH. Qualities of effective teachers. 3rd ed. Ascd. 2018. [Article]
6. Alaagib NA, Musa OA, Saeed AM. Comparison of the effectiveness of lectures based on problems and traditional lectures in physiology teaching in Sudan. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19(1):1-8. [DOI]
7. BS N. Students’ engagement and perceptions of small group tutorial classes among undergraduate medical students. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism. 2021;9(1):18-25. [DOI] [PubMed]
9. Mir MM, Jeelani M, Alshahrani MS. A practical approach for successful small group teaching in medical schools with student centered curricula. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism. 2019;7(3):149. [DOI]
10. Majhi P, Sulakhe R. Didactic lectures and small group discussions among undergraduate students in a medical college-A comparative study. Journal of Educational Research and Medical Teacher. 2014;2(2):10-11. [Article]
12. Sahu PK, Nayak S, Rodrigues V. Medical students’ perceptions of small group teaching effectiveness in hybrid curriculum. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2018;7. [DOI]
14. Rezaeian M. The Role of Facilitator in Teaching and Learning Within Small Groups: A Continuing Education Article. Journal of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences. 2019. [DOI]
15. ChandelkarUK RP, Kulkarni M. Assessment of the impact of small group teaching over didactic lectures and self-directed learning among second-year BDS students in general and dental pharmacology in GOA Medical College. Pharmacologyonline. 2014;3:51-7. laborators. [Article]
16. Qamar MR, Ahmad A, Niaz K. Learning through small group discussion versus didactic lectures. Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal. 2015;65(3):386- 90. [Article]
17. Bobby Z, Nandeesha H, Sridhar M, et al. Identification of mistakes and their correction by a small group discussion as a revision exercise at the end of a teaching module in biochemistry. The National Medical Journal of India. 2014;27(1):22-23. [PubMed]
18. Yadgarovna MF, Husenovich RT. Advantages and disadvantages of the method of working in small groups in teaching higher mathematics. Academy. 2020(4 (55):65-68. [DOI]
19. Safavi AH, Shi Q, Ding M, et al. Structured, small-group hands-on teaching sessions improve pre-clerk knowledge and confidence in point-of-care ultrasound use and interpretation. Cureus. 2018;10(10). [DOI]
20. Artino Jr AR, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Medical Teacher. 2014;36(6):463-74. [DOI]
21. Yusoff MSB. ABC of content validation and content validity index calculation. Resource 2019;11(2):49-54. [DOI]
22. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel Psychology 1975; 28(4): 563-75. [DOI]
23. Harden RM, Sowden S, Dunn WR. Educational strategies in curriculum development: the SPICES model. Medical Education. 1984; 18(4): 284-97. [DOI]
24. Behera BK, Agasti N, Sahoo K. Evaluation of impact of an integrated lecture method of teaching among undergraduate medical students, compared to traditional didactical lectures in reference to antenatal care. Int J Adv Med. 2017;4(3):640-44. International Journal of Advances in Medicine. [DOI]
25. Tuma F. The use of educational technology for interactive teaching in lectures. Annals of Medicine and Surgery. 2021;62:231-35.] [DOI]
26. Deslauriers L, McCarty LS, Miller K, Callaghan K, Kestin G. Measuring actual learning versus feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2019;116(39):19251-57. [DOI]
27. Sridevi V, SUBBARAMAIAH N, LATHA TELANG M, et al. Students’ engagement and perceptions of small group tutorial classes among undergraduate medical students. Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism 2021;9(1):18. [DOI]
28. 25. Padugupati S, Joshi K, Yamini D, Chary RS, Sarma D. Educational outcomes of small group discussion versus traditional lecture among first year undergraduate medical students. Journal of Education Technology in Health Sciences. 2017;4(3):93-96. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
