Literature DB >> 10211264

Computer-aided learning: an overvalued educational resource?

P Devitt1, E Palmer.   

Abstract

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the place of computer-aided learning in a basic science course in the undergraduate medical curriculum at the University of Adelaide.
METHODS: A software program was written which would allow students to study the anatomy and physiology of the liver and biliary tree in three different styles. Identical content was produced, matched for each style (problem-based, didactic and free text response) and students randomly allocated to one of four groups (three computer and one control). Students were tested before and after access to the program.
RESULTS: Ninety second-year students completed the study. Those students who had access to the material in the problem-based and free text response styles did no better in the post-study test than the controls, whilst the group who had studied the didactically presented computer material performed significantly better than the other three groups. All three computer groups accessed the material on a similar number of occasions, but the group who had access to the free text entry program spent significantly less time on computer study.
CONCLUSIONS: If computer materials are to be provided as a learning resource for the basic medical sciences, provision must be made for the style of teaching of the course and the style of learning of the students attending that course.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10211264     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999.00284.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Educ        ISSN: 0308-0110            Impact factor:   6.251


  17 in total

1.  Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education.

Authors:  T Greenhalgh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-01-06

Review 2.  The computer-based lecture.

Authors:  M M Wofford; A W Spickard; J L Wofford
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  The impact of the Virtual Ophthalmology Clinic on medical students' learning: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  T Succar; G Zebington; F Billson; K Byth; S Barrie; P McCluskey; J Grigg
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Scaling-up undergraduate medical education: enabling virtual mobility by online elective courses.

Authors:  Suncana Kukolja-Taradi; Zoran Dogas; Marina Dabić; Ines Drenjancevic Perić
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.351

5.  Comparison of two lecture delivery platforms in a hybrid distance education program.

Authors:  L Douglas Ried; Katherine Byers
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 2.047

6.  [Implementation of the eLearning project NESTOR. A network for students in traumatology and orthopedics].

Authors:  D A Back; N Haberstroh; E Hoff; J Plener; N P Haas; C Perka; G Schmidmaier
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 7.  E-learning in orthopedic surgery training: A systematic review.

Authors:  Sandip P Tarpada; Matthew T Morris; Denver A Burton
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-09-21

8.  Effective Use of Multimedia Technology in Athletic Training Education.

Authors:  Denise L Wiksten; Jarrod Spanjer; Kathy LaMaster
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.860

9.  Evaluation of Computer-aided Strategies for Teaching Medical Students Prenatal Ultrasound Diagnostic Skills.

Authors:  Lawrence S Amesse; Ealena Callendar; Teresa Pfaff-Amesse; Janice Duke; William N P Herbert
Journal:  Med Educ Online       Date:  2008-09-24

10.  Electronic learning can facilitate student performance in undergraduate surgical education: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  David Gerard Healy; Fergal J Fleming; David Gilhooley; Patrick Felle; Alfred Edward Wood; Thomas Gorey; Enda W McDermott; John M Fitzpatrick; Niall J O'Higgins; Arnold D K Hill
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2005-06-29       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.