LECTURES IN MEDICAL EDUCATON: WHAT STUDENTS THINK?

Authors

  • Tajammal Mustafa
  • Zerwa Farooq
  • Zunaira Asad
  • Rabbia Amjad
  • Iffat Badar
  • Abdul Majeed Chaudhry
  • Mohammad Amer Zaman Khan
  • Farida Rafique

Abstract

Background: The volume of medical knowledge has increased exponentially and so has the need to improve the efficiency of current teaching practices.With increasing emphasis on interactive and problem based learning, the place of lectures in modern medical education has become a questionable issue. Objectives were to assess the perspective of undergraduate medical students regarding the role and effectiveness of lectures as a mode of instruction as well as the ways and means that can be employed to enhance the effectiveness of lectures. Methods: A cross sectional study was carried out among 2nd to final year medical students from five medical colleges including both private and public sector institutions. A total of 347 students participated by completing a structured questionnaire. Data was analyzed using SPSS-17. Results: Sixty seven percent students considered lectures as a useful mode of instruction (47% males and 77% females), whereas 83% of the students reported that clinical sessions were superior to lectures because of small number of students in clinical sessions, active student participation, enhanced clinical orientation, and interaction with patients. About 64% responded that lectures should be replaced by clinical sessions. Majority of the students (92%) reported not being able to concentrate during a lecture beyond 30 minutes, whereas 70% skipped lectures as they were boring. A significantly greater proportion of male respondents, students from clinical years, and those who skipped lectures, considered lectures to be boring, a poor utilization of time and resources, and could not concentrate for the full duration of a lecture compared to females, students from preclinical years, and those who do not skip lectures, respectively. Conclusion: Lecturing techniques need to be improvised. The traditional passive mode of instruction has to be replaced with active learning and inquiry based approach to adequately utilize the time and resources spent on lectures.Keywords: Lectures, medical students, medical education, clinical sessions, active learning

References

Flexner A, editor. Medical Education in the United States and Canada: A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Boston: Merrymount Press;1910.

Parsell GJ, Bligh J. The changing context of undergraduate medical education. Postgrad Med J 1995;71(837):397–403

Seifer SD. Recent and emerging trends in undergraduate medical education. Curricular responses to a rapidly changing health care system. West J Med 1998;168:400–11.

Sebai ZA. Medical education: which way forward? J Family Community Med 2001;8(3):17–8

Edward H, Smith B, Webb G, editors. Lecturing: Case studies, experience and practice. London: Kogan; 2001.

Mazur E. Education. Farewell, lecture? Science 2009;323:50–1

Diane E, Carol B, Sylvester A. Innovation in large lectures_teaching for active learning. University of california press journals, Bio Sci 1997;9:601–7.

Deslauriers L, Schelew E, Wieman C. Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science 2011;332:862–4.

Exley K, Dennick R, editors. Giving a Lecture: from presenting to teaching. London: Routledge; 2004.

Qian D. Facilitating active learning with international students: what worked and what didn’t. J Educ Res Group Adelaide 2011;2(1):35–46

Manzoor I, Mukhtar F, Hashmi NR. Medical students' perspective about role-plays as a teaching strategy in community medicine. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2012;22:222–5.

de Jong Z, van Nies JA, Peters SW, Vink S, Dekker FW, Scherpbier A. Interactive seminars or small group tutorials in preclinical medical education: results of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Med Educ 2010;10:79.

Tayyeb R. Effectiveness of problem based learning as an instructional tool for acquisition of content knowledge and promotion of critical thinking among medical students. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2013;23(1):42–6.

Gurpinar E, Musal B, Aksakoglu G, Ucku R. Comparison of knowledge scores of medical students in problem-based learning and traditional curriculum on public health topics. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5:7.

Purl D. An integrated problem based curriculum for biochemistry teaching in medical sciences. Indian J Clin Biochem 2002;17(2):52–9.

Bulstrode C, Gallagher FA, Pilling EL, Furniss D, Proctor RD. A randomized control trials comparing two methods of teaching medical students trauma and orthopedics: traditional lectures versus the ‘donut round’. Surgeon 2003;1(2):76–80.

Fischer RL, Jacobs SL, Herbert WN. Small-group discussion versus lecture format for third-year students in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104(2):349–53.

Cardall S, Krupat E, Ulrich M. Live lecture versus video-recorded lecture: are students voting with their feet? Acad Med. 2008;83:1174–8.

Khalifa M, Lam R. Web based learning_effects on learning and outcomes. Educ, IEEE Transac On 2002;45:350–56.

McLauglin K, Mandin H. A schematic approach to diagnosing and resolving lecturalgia. Med Edu 2001;35:1135–42.

Wilson K, Korn JH. Attention during lectures: beyond ten minutes. Teach Psychol 2007;34(2):85–9.

Dent J, editor. Lectures: A practical guide for medical teachers. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2005.

Matheson C. The educational value and effectiveness of lectures. Clin Teach 2008;5(4):218–21.

Charlton BG. Lectures are an effective teaching method because they exploit human evolved human nature to improve learning. Med Hypotheses 2006;67:1261–5.

Draper S, Brown M. Increasing interactivity in lectures using an electronic voting system. J Comput Assist Learn 2004;20(2):81–94.

Cain J, Black EP, Rohr J. An audience response system strategy to improve student motivation, attention, and feedback. Am J Pharm Educ 2009;73(2):21.

Palmer EJ, Devitt PG, De Young NJ, Morris D. Assessment of an electronic voting system within the tutorial setting: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Educ 2005;5(1):24.

Manzoor I, Mumtaz A, Habib M, Tariq S, Elahee M, Javaid I. Lectures in medical education: students' views. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2011;23(4):118–21.

Hashmi NR, Daud S, Manzoor I. Medical education: views and recommendations by final year MBBS students of a private medical college in Lahore. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2010;20(2):93–7.

Najmi RS. Lecture as a mode of instruction in undergraduate medical education. J Pak Med Assoc 1999;49(2):30–3.

Manzar B, Manzar N. To determine the level of satisfaction among the public sector medical students of a public sector medical university regarding their academic activities. BMC Res Notes 2011;4:380.

Bahar-Ozvaris S, Sonmez R, Sayek I. Assessment of knowledge and skills in primary health care services: senior medical students' self-evaluation. Teach Learn Med 2004;16(1):34–8.

Burch VC, Nash RC, Zabow T, Gibbs T, Aubin L, Jacobs B, et al. A structured assessment of newly qualified medical graduates. Med Educ. 2005;39:723–31.

Published

2014-01-01

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 1 (2014): JOURNAL OF AYUB MEDICAL COLLEGE, ABBOTTABAD

Section

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

License

Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License  CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.

USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.