Comparison between the Effect of Teaching through StudentBased Group Discussion and Lecture on Learning in Medical Students

Mahram, Manoochehr; Mahram, Behrooz; Mousavinasab, Seyyed Nouroddin

Comparison between the Effect of Teaching through StudentBased Group Discussion and Lecture on Learning in Medical Students

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Manoochehr Mahram ¹

Behrooz Mahram ²

Seyyed Nouroddin Mousavinasab ³

¹ Pediatrician, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics Dept., School of Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran

² Ph.D. in Curriculum Planning, Assistant Professor of Educational Sciences Dept., School of Education and Psychology, Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran

³ Ph.D. in Biostatistics, Associate Professor of Community Medicine Dept., School of Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran

Abstract

Background & Objective : It has been years that the traditional method of lecture is used for teaching and both teachers and students are unsatisfied with this methods tediousness and low efficacy According to low experience in teaching theoretical clinical courses via studentbased group discussion in small groups this study was performed to compare learning resulted from the aforementioned method and lecture Methods In this semiexperimental study lecture and group discussion in small groups (6 to 8 members) were tested in theoretical course of pediatrics in four series of students in Zanjan School of Medicine Some topics were taught using lecture while others were taught using studentbased group discussion At the end of all classes quizzes were given to the students the results from these quizzes and final exams were compared in both teaching methods Results The mean percentage of correct answers in quizzes in methods of group discussion and lecture were 84% and 45% respectively which was significantly different (P = 00001) The mean percentage of correct answers to the questions in final exams was 67% and 65% for group discussion and lecture accordingly while there was no significant difference(P=019) Conclusion : Regarding the results of this study and similar researches learning via group discussion seems to be more profound and effective but this profundity was not present in the final exam which may be due to the defects in designing questions and emphasizing on students memorized content

Keywords

Group discussion

Small group

lecture

Teaching method

medical student

Joyce B, Weil M, Calhoun E. Models of teaching. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2001.
Garavan TN, Ocinneide B. Entrepreneurship education and training programs: A review and evaluation. J Europ Indust Train 1994; 18(8): 3-12.
Regan L, Hopkins J. 12 highly interactive teaching: A "HIT" With Residents". Acade Emergen Med. 2008; 15(S1): S229-30.
Azizi F. Medical sciences education: challenges and perspectives. Tehran: Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Deputy for Education and Student affairs; 2003: 327. [In Persian]
Barrass R. Study! A guide to effective learning, revision and examination techniques. 2nd ed. London: Rutledge Pub; 2002: 59-63.
Brown G, Atkins M. Effective teaching in higher education. London: Rutledge; 1991: 50.
Wing-Yi Cheng R, Lam S, Chung-yan Chan J. When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project- based learning. British J Educ Psycho 2008; 78(2): 205-21.
Light G, Cox R. Learning and teaching in higher education. London: Paul Chapman; 2002: 207.
Curran VR, Sharpe D, Forristall J, Flynn K. Student satisfaction and perceptions of small group in case-based inter professional learning. Med Teach 2008; 30(4): 431-3.
Exley K, Dennick R. Small Group Teaching. London: Routledg–Falmer; 2004: 2, 13-31.
Brilhare JK, Galanes GJ, Adams K. Effective Group Discussion: Theory and Practice. 10^th ed. New York: McGrow-Hill; 2001: 35,123.
Saif AA. Educational measurement, assessment and evaluation. 4th ed. Tehran: Roshd; 2008: 419. [In Persian].
Murphy KR, Davidshofer CO. Psychological testing: Principles & applications. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall; 1991: 107.
Delaram M. The effect of lecture and focus group teaching methods on midwifery student’s learning in obstetrics (2) course. J Med Educ Develop 2006; 2(2): 3-7. [In Persian]
Dusold R, Sadoski M. Self-directed learning versus lecture in medicine. Acad Exch 2006;10: 29-32.
Fischer RL, Jacobs SL, Herbert WNP. Small group discussion versus lecture format for third-year students in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecole 2004; 104(2): 349-53.
Herzig S, Linke RM, Marxen B, Borner U, Antepohl W. Long-term follow-up of factual knowledge after a single randomized problembased learning course. BMC Med Educ 2003; 3: 3.
Slavin RE, Cheung A, Groff C, Lake C. Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Read Res Quart 2008; 43(3): 290-322.
Feingold CE, Cobb MD, Givens RH, Arnold J, Joslin S, Keller JL. Student perceptions of team learning in nursing education. J Nurs Educ 2008; 47(5): 214-22.
Bourgeois JA, Ton H, Onate J, McCarty T, Stevenson FT, Servis ME, et al. The doctoring curriculum at the University of California, Davis school of medicine: leadership and participant roles for psychiatry faculty. Acade Psych 2008; 32(3): 249-54.
Antepohl W, Herzig S. Problem-based learning versus lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology: A controlled, randomized study. Med Educ 1999; 33(2): 106-13.