| Literature DB >> 33181674 |
Chenchen Yang1, Xiaoxian Yang1, Hanqi Yang2, Yuqin Fan3,4.
Abstract
Flipped classroom has received much attention in medical education. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of flipped classroom combing with human anatomy web-based learning system in anatomy education.A total of 89 freshmen in medical specialty were enrolled and randomly allocated into either the experimental group (receiving the flipped classroom with human anatomy web-based learning system, n = 45) or control group (receiving the traditional classroom teaching, n = 44). A pre-quiz and a post-quiz were conducted before and after the classes, respectively. The improvement in scores between groups was compared. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to evaluate perceptions and experience.The mean pre-quiz scores of the 2 groups were comparable (all P > .05). However, the mean post-quiz score in the experimental group was significantly higher than that in the control group (91.44 ± 6.25 vs 86.13 ± 11.67, P < .05). The results of questionnaires showed that 44 (97.8%) students agreed with flipped classroom combined with human anatomy web-based learning system, 43 (95.6%) students obtained improved study interest in anatomy learning, and 42 (93.3%) students felt that the interactive, applied in-class activities during the class greatly enhanced their learning.Flipped classroom combined with human anatomy web-based learning system can be used as an effective learning tool for anatomy education.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33181674 PMCID: PMC7668434 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023096
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Figure 1A graphical overview of the study design.
Demographic information of participants.
| Control group (n = 44) | Experimental group (n = 45) | ||
| Age, yr | 19.74 ± 0.74 | 19.71 ± 0.75 | .70 |
| Gender | .97 | ||
| Male | 5 (11.4%) | 5 (11.1%) | |
| Female | 39 (88.6%) | 40 (88.9%) | |
| Pre-quiz score | 35.70 ± 6.42 | 33.87 ± 3.81 | .10 |
Scores of experimental group and control group (mean ± SD).
| Control group (n = 44) | Experimental group (n = 45) | ||
| Total post-quiz scores | 86.13 ± 11.67 | 91.44 ± 6.25 | .01 |
| School work scores (accounted for 10%) | 8.12 ± 0.86 | 8.88 ± 0.74 | <.01 |
| Examination scores of anatomical specimens (accounted for 40%) | 29.16 ± 7.33 | 32.13 ± 5.11 | <.01 |
| The final exam score (accounted for 50%) | 43.20 ± 6.15 | 46.29 ± 4.95 | .01 |
Perceptions of the students to the teaching-learning activity/%.
| Response on Likert scale | |||||||
| Number | Content and structure | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean rating |
| 1 | Learning key foundational content prior to coming to class given by teacher greatly enhanced my learning of course material in class | 23 (51.1) | 17 (37.8) | 3 (6.7) | 2 (4.4) | 0 | 4.36 |
| 2 | I read assigned readings prior to coming to class | 24 (53.3) | 14 (31.1) | 4 (8.9) | 3 (6.7) | 0 | 4.38 |
| 3 | The teaching method greatly enhanced my learning | 26 (57.8) | 16 (35.7) | 2 (4.4) | 1 (2.2) | 0 | 4.49 |
| 4 | I participated and engaged in discussions in class | 15 (33.3) | 24 (53.3) | 4 (8.8) | 2 (4.4) | 0 | 4.16 |
| 5 | Enjoyable way of learning, and full of interest | 26 (57.8) | 16 (35.6) | 3 (6.6) | 0 | 0 | 4.87 |
| 6 | This method was more engaging and interesting in comparison to traditional class | 34 (75.6) | 9 (20.0) | 2 (4.4) | 0 | 0 | 4.71 |
| 7 | More such modules should be organized in the future | 34 (75.6) | 11 (24.4) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4.76 |
| 8 | I agreed with this teaching model | 37 (82.2) | 7 (15.6) | 1 (2.7) | 0 | 0 | 4.80 |
| 9 | This teaching method has the advantage in understanding and remembering | 30 (66.7) | 13 (28.9) | 2 (4.4) | 0 | 0 | 4.62 |