| Literature DB >> 29137662 |
Nipun Lakshitha de Silva1, Balasundaram Parththipan2, Chaturaka Rodrigo2,3, Godwin Constantine2, Sumadhya Deepika Fernando4, Senaka Rajapakse2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to; (a) evaluate the current practices of peer assisted learning among second year and final year medical students of Faculty of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka; (b) identify reasons for engaging in peer assisted learning; (c) identify perceived weaknesses in current learning activities; and (d) determine student characteristics associated with engaging in peer assisted learning.Entities:
Keywords: Medical students; Peer-assisted learning; Sri Lanka; Undergraduate teaching
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29137662 PMCID: PMC5686898 DOI: 10.1186/s13104-017-2920-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Comparison of prior preparation and after studying in relation to PAL among second year (n-162) and final year (n-122) students
| Second year (%) | Final year (%) | Chi square value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation | |||
| Any kind of preparation | 123 (82.6%) | 69 (59%) | 22.541* |
| Read relevant lecture notes | 114 (75.5%) | 50 (42.7%) | 32.915* |
| Read relevant sections in text books | 86 (57.3%) | 52 (44.4%) | 8.180 |
| Refer to internet | 54 (37.7%) | 27 (23.1%) | 9.625* |
| Make own notes | 44 (29.1%) | 24 (20.5%) | 3.549 |
| After studies | |||
| Any kind of after studies | 146 (96.1%) | 105 (89.7%) | 4.826 |
| Read relevant lecture notes | 115 (75.7%) | 75 (64.1%) | 4.867 |
| Read relevant sections in text books | 117 (77%) | 82 (71%) | 2.233 |
| Refer to internet | 62 (40.8%) | 45 (38.5%) | 0.749 |
| Make own notes | 75 (45.3%) | 55 (47%) | 0.743 |
| Refer to notes made during the PAL | 74 (48.7%) | 55 (47%) | 0.249 |
Different methods of preparatory work by students prior to PAL activities and after studies following PAL activities are indicated with percentage. Since response rate for each question is less than 100% percentage calculated based on the number of responders as the denominator
* p < 0.05
Self-reported strengths and weaknesses of PAL: a comparison between first year (n-162) and final year (n-122) students
| Second year (%) | Final year (%) | Chi square value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strengths | |||
| Preference for small group learning | 116 (75.3%) | 72 (62.1%) | 5.498 |
| Room to clarify doubts | 118 (76.6%) | 74 (63.8%) | 5.302 |
| Convenient, flexible schedule | 59 (38.3%) | 48 (41.4%) | 0.260 |
| Easier to concentrate | 84 (54.5%) | 67 (57.8%) | 1.701 |
| Use of native language | 95 (61.7%) | 65 (56%) | 0.876 |
| Help with exam preparation | 132 (85.7%) | 101 (87.1%) | 0.103 |
| Easy to understand peer teaching | 99 (64.3%) | 60 (51.7%) | 4.313 |
| Supplements formal teaching | 114 (74%) | 79 (68.1%) | 1.139 |
| Non-threatening environment | 118 (76.6%) | 89 (76.6%) | 0.000 |
| Summarizes important points | 119 (77.3%) | 94 (81%) | 0.562 |
| Providing in-depth knowledge of the subject area | 116 (75.3%) | 102 (87.9%) | 6.762* |
| Weaknesses | |||
| Reliability of content | 62 (40.8%) | 39 (33.6%) | 1.648 |
| Facts being unaccepted in examinations | 63 (41.7%) | 43 (37.1%) | 1.028 |
| Promotion of exam oriented learning | 70 (46.4%) | 51 (44%) | 0.585 |
| Irrelevant content | 51 (33.6%) | 15 (13%) | 14.831* |
Strengths and weaknesses of PAL activities as indicated by the students with percentages presented in table
* p < 0.05
Association of student characteristics with mean self perceived frequency of participation in PAL (Likert scale 0–5)
| Characteristic | Categories | Mean frequency | t test |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 2.892 | − 2.964* |
| Female | 3.422 | ||
| Medium of school education | English | 3.231 | 0.183 |
| Native | 3.159 | ||
| Attempt at which entered medical school | First | 3.050 | − 1.393 |
| Second or third | 3.316 | ||
| Student having doubt about veracity of content | Yes | 2.870 | − 2.518* |
| No | 3.346 | ||
| Student believing that PAL promotes exam oriented learning | Yes | 2.905 | − 2.716* |
| No | 3.401 | ||
| Performing preparatory work prior to attending to PAL | Yes | 3.099 | − 1.507 |
| No | 3.393 | ||
| Performing after studies following PAL | Yes | 3.312 | 3.917* |
| No | 2.059 |
Some likely factors to associate with frequency of utilization of PAL are given in the table. Students’ perceived weaknesses also negatively affect the participation in PAL
* p < 0.05