AIMS: The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a blended course (a combined face-to-face and online instruction) on undergraduate oral radiology and evaluate it by comparing its educational effectiveness (derived from students' performance and answers to questionnaires) to a conventional course's. Students' attitudes concerning the blended methodology were also registered. METHODOLOGY: An original course was developed and implemented, and its electronic version was uploaded to an e-learning educational platform. The course was attended by two groups of final-year students, who were taught by either the conventional face-to-face methodology or the blended learning methodology. Students answered a series of questionnaires, before and after following the course, regarding their perceptions, attitudes and evaluation of the course. Additionally, they completed knowledge assessment tests and their grades (before and after the course) were compared. Educational effectiveness of the course was determined by analysing the results of the questionnaires and the tests. RESULTS: Students in the blended group performed significantly better than their colleagues of the conventional group in the post-course knowledge test, and female students of the blended group performed better than male students. Students evaluated high the course content, organisation, educational material, and the blended group students additionally appreciated the course design and clarity of instructions. Students' attitudes towards elements of blended learning (effectiveness, motivation and active engagement) were very positive. Most of the blended group students, who attended the face-to-face meeting (approx. 91%), evaluated it as helpful for summarising the subject and clarifying difficult issues. CONCLUSIONS: Blended learning is effective and well evaluated by dental students and can be implemented in undergraduate curriculum for teaching oral radiology.
AIMS: The purpose of this study was to develop and implement a blended course (a combined face-to-face and online instruction) on undergraduate oral radiology and evaluate it by comparing its educational effectiveness (derived from students' performance and answers to questionnaires) to a conventional course's. Students' attitudes concerning the blended methodology were also registered. METHODOLOGY: An original course was developed and implemented, and its electronic version was uploaded to an e-learning educational platform. The course was attended by two groups of final-year students, who were taught by either the conventional face-to-face methodology or the blended learning methodology. Students answered a series of questionnaires, before and after following the course, regarding their perceptions, attitudes and evaluation of the course. Additionally, they completed knowledge assessment tests and their grades (before and after the course) were compared. Educational effectiveness of the course was determined by analysing the results of the questionnaires and the tests. RESULTS: Students in the blended group performed significantly better than their colleagues of the conventional group in the post-course knowledge test, and female students of the blended group performed better than male students. Students evaluated high the course content, organisation, educational material, and the blended group students additionally appreciated the course design and clarity of instructions. Students' attitudes towards elements of blended learning (effectiveness, motivation and active engagement) were very positive. Most of the blended group students, who attended the face-to-face meeting (approx. 91%), evaluated it as helpful for summarising the subject and clarifying difficult issues. CONCLUSIONS: Blended learning is effective and well evaluated by dental students and can be implemented in undergraduate curriculum for teaching oral radiology.
Authors: Rick Hess; Nicholas E Hagemeier; Reid Blackwelder; Daniel Rose; Nasar Ansari; Tandy Branham Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 2.047