Literature DB >> 19330674

The failure of e-learning research to inform educational practice, and what we can do about it.

David A Cook1.   

Abstract

When a new technology is introduced, earlier studies focus on demonstrations of efficacy, followed by studies comparing the new technology against the old. However, such studies do little to advance the new technology. Using an analogy with the automobile the author argues that e-learning is neither inherently superior nor inferior to traditional instruction; rather they are different and complementary. Each can effectively serve different purposes and functions suited to its strengths. A recent meta-analysis of internet-based instruction concluded that existing research provides reassurance that e-learning is better than nothing and similar (on average) to traditional instruction, but yields little guidance on how to effectively use e-learning. e-Learning research to-date has done little to inform educational practice, and further no-intervention-controlled studies or comparisons with traditional instructional methods are not needed. Instead, we need to clarify how and when to use e-learning through 'basic science' research and 'field tests' comparing one e-learning intervention to another.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19330674     DOI: 10.1080/01421590802691393

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Teach        ISSN: 0142-159X            Impact factor:   3.650


  19 in total

1.  Increasing medical students' engagement in public health: case studies illustrating the potential role of online learning.

Authors:  J Sheringham; A Lyon; A Jones; J Strobl; H Barratt
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 2.341

2.  [Learning success of students in surgery with a multimedia-based manual. A prospective randomized trial].

Authors:  C Pape-Köhler; C Chmelik; M M Heiss; R Lefering
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 3.  Mobile Learning in Medical Education.

Authors:  Blanka Klímová
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 4.460

4.  Innovation and design of a web-based pain education interprofessional resource.

Authors:  Leila Lax; Judy Watt-Watson; Michelle Lui; Adam Dubrowski; Michael McGillion; Judith Hunter; Cameron Maclennan; Kerry Knickle; Anja Robb; Jaime Lapeyre
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.037

5.  Evidence-based choices of physicians: a comparative analysis of physicians participating in Internet CME and non-participants.

Authors:  Linda Casebeer; Jennifer Brown; Nancy Roepke; Cyndi Grimes; Blake Henson; Ryan Palmore; U Shanette Granstaff; Gregory D Salinas
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2010-06-10       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  How to improve medical education website design.

Authors:  Stephen D Sisson; Felicia Hill-Briggs; David Levine
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2010-04-21       Impact factor: 2.463

7.  An systematic review of e-learning outcomes in undergraduate dental radiology curricula-levels of learning and implications for researchers and curriculum planners.

Authors:  Michael G Botelho; Kalpana R Agrawal; Michael M Bornstein
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 2.419

8.  Acceptance of technology-enhanced learning for a theoretical radiological science course: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Emeka Nkenke; Elefterios Vairaktaris; Anne Bauersachs; Stephan Eitner; Alexander Budach; Christoph Knipfer; Florian Stelzle
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 2.463

9.  Mobile Medical Education (MoMEd) - how mobile information resources contribute to learning for undergraduate clinical students - a mixed methods study.

Authors:  Bethany S Davies; Jethin Rafique; Tim R Vincent; Jil Fairclough; Mark H Packer; Richard Vincent; Inam Haq
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-01-12       Impact factor: 2.463

10.  Learning from simple ebooks, online cases or classroom teaching when acquiring complex knowledge. A randomized controlled trial in respiratory physiology and pulmonology.

Authors:  Bjarne Skjødt Worm
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.