| Literature DB >> 34584482 |
Kimi Soumya Padhi1, Govinda Balmuchu1, Partha Sarathi Acharya1, Sudipta Ranjan Singh1, Tony Joseph1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the challenges, effectiveness, level of reception and acceptance of E-learning by students (learners) and faculty (educators) in a medical college during the lockdown period of the COVID-19 pandemic.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; conventional pedagogy effectiveness; lockdown; medical education
Year: 2021 PMID: 34584482 PMCID: PMC8464331 DOI: 10.2147/AMEP.S326147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract ISSN: 1179-7258
E-Learning Related Responses by the Learners
| Question | Yes | No |
|---|---|---|
| Previous exposure of E-learning (N = 203) | 94 (46.3%) | 109 (53.7%) |
| Satisfied with the E-learning provided by the institution (N = 203) | 116 (57.1%) | 87 (42.9%) |
| Handouts to be provided prior to class (N = 203) | 185 (91.1%) | 18 (8.9%) |
| Evaluation required of the topics covered (N = 203) | 116 (57.1%) | 87 (42.9%) |
| Practical classes content to be covered in E-learning (N = 203) | 107 (71.4%) | 58 (28.6%) |
| Feedback mechanism post E-learning sessions (N = 203) | 157 (77.3%) | 46 (22.7%) |
Descriptive Data Regarding E-Learning by the Learners
| Question | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Most preferred app for accessing E-learning (N = 203) | Google Meet | Zoom | GoToMeeting | Others |
| 192 (94.6%) | 6 (2.96%) | 3 (1.48%) | 2 (0.96%) | |
| Device used to access E-learning (N = 203) | Smart phone | Laptop | Tablet | Desktop |
| 171 (84.2%) | 41 (20.2%) | 40 (19.7%) | 3 (1.5%) | |
| Appropriate duration of a single lecture (N = 203) | 30–40 min | 40–60 min | 20–30 min | 20 min |
| 102 (50.2%) | 79 (38.9%) | 20 (9.9%) | 2 (1%) | |
| Total duration of E-learning in a day (N = 203) | 2–3 hr | 1–2 hr | 3–4 hr | Others |
| 98 (48.2%) | 81 (39.9%) | 20 (9.9%) | 4 (2%) | |
| Convenient timing (N = 203) | 10 am −12 pm | 8 am –10 am | 2 pm – 4 pm | Others |
| 147 (72.4%) | 27 (13.3%) | 25 (12.3%) | 4 (2%) | |
| Number of sessions for online classes (if total duration more than 2 hrs) (N = 120) | 2 sessions | 3 sessions | 1 session | |
| 71 (59.2%) | 41 (34.2%) | 8 (6.7%) |
Figure 1Reasons for dissatisfaction with E-learning (Multiple response-based answer).
Cross-Tabulation of Satisfied and Dissatisfied Students with Effectiveness of E-Learning and Using It as Supplement
| Satisfied with E-Learning | p-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | ||
| Yes | 48 | 22 | 0.01 |
| No | 68 | 65 | |
| Effective | 47 | 18 | 0.003 |
| Not effective | 69 | 69 | |
Notes: p-value was calculated using chi-square test; [Agree and strongly agree – taken as yes for use of E-learning as supplement; Score 4 and 5 – regarded as effective].
E-Learning Related Response by the Educators
| Question | Yes | No | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Previous exposure of E-learning (N=24) | 17 (70.8%) | 07 (29.2%) | |
| Evaluation methods used in E-learning to be used for | Formative Assessment | 21 (87.5%) | 03 (12.5%) |
| Summative Assessment | 07 (29.2%) | 17 (70.8%) | |
| Practical classes content to be included in E-learning module | 20 (83.3%) | 04 (16.7%) | |
| Feedback mechanism post E-learning sessions | 22 (91.7%) | 02 (8.3%) | |
| Awareness about the concept of cyber bullying | 17 (70.8%) | 07 (29.2%) | |
Grading of Various Responses by the Educators
| Score Range | Responses | Mean Score |
|---|---|---|
| 0 – No experience | Experience of teaching in E-learning | 3.25 |
| 1 – Very weak | Overall Proficiency in E-learning | 3.66 |
| 1 – Least convenient | Teaching in conventional classroom | 4.45 |
| Teaching in online mode | 3.37 | |
| 0 – Not required | Communication skill | 4.20 |
| Technological skill | 3.91 | |
| Assessment & Evaluation skill | 3.54 | |
| Time Management skill | 3.45 | |
| 1 – Least preferred | Live AV streaming with PPT | 4.16 |
| Recorded AV with PPT | 3.45 | |
| 0 – No effect | Difficulty in conducting practicals | 4.08 |
| Internet connectivity issues | 4.04 | |
| Face-to-face interaction with students | 3.75 | |
| Attentiveness of students | 3.66 | |
| Lack of supervision | 3.25 | |
| 1 – Ineffective | E-learning is effective mode of pedagogy | 3.33 |
Abbreviations: AV, audio-visual; PPT, PowerPoint presentation.
Correlation Between Various Factors Related to the Educators
| Correlation Between | Spearman’s Coefficient | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| Experience and Technological skill | 0.180 | |
| Experience and Proficiency | 0.32 | |
| Experience and Effectiveness | 0.002 | |
| Convenience and Effectiveness | 0.000 |
Notes: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); ρ, Spearman’s coefficient.
Suggestions Provided by the Learners and Educators
| Learners | Educators |
|---|---|
| ● The topics should be covered in multiple sessions with shorter duration instead of single session with longer duration. | ● Covering the predefined curriculum via E-learning is challenging in terms of content and time management. The curriculum should be revised if E-learning becomes the primary mode of teaching and learning. Faculty may be trained in use of different online platforms as well as E-learning methods for fruitful learning. |