Literature DB >> 12107634

The influence of tutor qualification on the process and outcome of learning in a problem-based course of basic medical pharmacology.

Jan Matthes1, Bent Marxen, Ralph-Mario Linke, Wolfram Antepohl, Silke Coburger, Hildegard Christ, Walter Lehmacher, Stefan Herzig.   

Abstract

Limited access to expert tutors is a problem that can be addressed by using tutors from different stages of medical or non-medical (under-, post-) graduate education. To address whether such differences in qualification affect the results of process evaluation by participants or their learning outcome (exam results), we analysed the data of a 4-year prospective study performed with 787 3rd-year medical students (111 groups of 5-10 participants) taking an obligatory problem-based learning (PbL)-course of basic pharmacology. We compared peer tutors (undergraduate medical students, >/=4th year), non-expert (junior) staff tutors (physicians, pharmacists, veterinarians, biologists, or chemists during postgraduate education), and expert (senior) staff tutors (completed postgraduate education). Evaluation scores related to PbL gave the highest values for senior staff-led groups. The tutor's performance score of peer-led groups did not differ from those of staff-led groups, but the score obtained from groups tutored by junior staff was lower than that obtained with senior staff tutors. Students' weekly preparation time tended to be lower in peer-led groups, while learning time spent specifically on exam preparation seemed to be increased compared to PbL-groups of staff tutors. As a putative confounding variable, tutors' experience in coaching PbL-groups was also investigated. Groups led by experienced tutors, defined as tutors with at least one term of previous PbL tutoring, were found to have significantly higher evaluation scores. Interestingly, neither tutors' subject-matter expertise (peer students, junior staff, or senior staff) nor their teaching-method expertise showed any influence on PbL-groups' mean test scores in a written exam. This indicates that the effect of tutor expertise on the learning process is not associated with a difference in learning outcome when just factual knowledge is assessed by traditional methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12107634     DOI: 10.1007/s00210-002-0551-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol        ISSN: 0028-1298            Impact factor:   3.000


  10 in total

Review 1.  Peer tutoring programs in health professions schools.

Authors:  Jennifer Santee; Linda Garavalia
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2006-06-15       Impact factor: 2.047

2.  The semi-structured triple jump--a new assessment tool reflects qualifications of tutors in a PBL course on basic pharmacology.

Authors:  Jan Matthes; Alexander Look; Amina K Hahne; Ara Tekian; Stefan Herzig
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 3.000

3.  Successful integration of radiation oncology in preclinical medical education : Experiences with an interdisciplinary training project.

Authors:  Michael Oertel; Martina Schmitz; Jan Carl Becker; Hans Theodor Eich; Anna Schober
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  A simple approach of applying blended learning to problem-based learning is feasible, accepted and does not affect evaluation and exam results-a just pre-pandemic randomised controlled mixed-method study.

Authors:  Ulrike Servos; Birger Reiß; Christoph Stosch; Yassin Karay; Jan Matthes
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 3.195

5.  Hospital staff education on severe sepsis/septic shock and hospital mortality: an original hypothesis.

Authors:  Maurizia Capuzzo; Marco Rambaldi; Giovanni Pinelli; Manuela Campesato; Antonia Pigna; Marco Zanello; Maria Barbagallo; Massimo Girardis; Elena Toschi
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 2.217

6.  Long-term follow up of factual knowledge after a single, randomised problem-based learning course.

Authors:  Stefan Herzig; Ralph-Mario Linke; Bent Marxen; Ulf Börner; Wolfram Antepohl
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2003-04-02       Impact factor: 2.463

7.  Preliminary investigation into application of problem-based learning in the practical teaching of diagnostics.

Authors:  Zeng Rui; Yue Rong-Zheng; Qiu Hong-Yu; Zeng Jing; Wan Xue-Hong; Zuo Chuan
Journal:  Adv Med Educ Pract       Date:  2015-03-25

8.  Does the tutors' academic background influence the learning objectives in problem-based learning?

Authors:  Matthaeus C Grasl; Karl Kremser; Jan Breckwoldt; Andreas Gleiss
Journal:  GMS J Med Educ       Date:  2020-02-17

9.  Problem-based learning and larger student groups: mutually exclusive or compatible concepts - a pilot study.

Authors:  Martyn P Kingsbury; Joanne S Lymn
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 2.463

10.  Integrating the teaching role into one's identity: a qualitative study of beginning undergraduate medical teachers.

Authors:  T van Lankveld; J Schoonenboom; R A Kusurkar; M Volman; J Beishuizen; G Croiset
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2016-06-18       Impact factor: 3.853

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.