A Cross-Sectional Study On the Preferences and Perception of MBBS Students Regarding Various Teaching Methods in A Medical College in South India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52783/jns.v14.2973Keywords:
MBBS students, teaching methods, problem-based learning, small group discussions, medical education, student preferencesAbstract
Medical education is increasingly shifting towards learner-centered methods, emphasizing interactive methods. The introduction of Competency-Based Medical Education in our country has prompted the exploration of students' preferences and perceptions regarding various teaching methods to optimize curriculum design and improve learning outcomes. Present study assessed the preferences and perceptions of MBBS students regarding various teaching-learning methods and their effectiveness at medical colleges in South India. A cross-sectional study involved 300 MBBS students from the 1st and 2nd Phases. A structured and validated questionnaire was used to gather data on demographics, preferences for teaching methods, and perceptions of their effectiveness. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests. The study found that problem-based learning (PBL) was the preferred teaching method (72.6% approval), followed by small group discussions (SGDs), with 69.9% approval. Traditional didactic lectures received a neutral response from the majority of students.
Regarding teaching aids, models, charts, and specimens were highly favored, with 80.5% approval. Students expressed better focus and interaction during PBL and SGDs than didactic lectures. The ideal session duration was 40-45 minutes, which 85.4% of students preferred. The study also highlighted that 71.4% of students were unaware of newer teaching methods, indicating a communication gaps regarding modern educational strategies. Our study highlights the preference for interactive teaching methods such as PBL and SGDs over traditional lectures. There is a need for awareness and communication improvement about innovative teaching methods. Thus, enhanced curriculum and trained faculty are needed accordingly to meet the evolving needs of medical students.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Prince, M., & Felder, R. M, 2006. Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123-138.
Mann, K. V., Boelen, C., & Hafferty, F. W., 2009. The role of the medical teacher in improving the educational environment. Medical Teacher, 31(9), 829-834.
Kumar, S., Aggarwal, R., & Jain, S, 2020. Students' perception of teaching methodologies in medical education: A cross-sectional study from India. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 9, 42.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S, 2014. Use of Web 2.0 technologies in higher education: A review of the literature. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 80-94.
Antepohl, W., & Herzig, S.,1999. Problem-based learning versus lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology: A controlled, randomized study. Medical Education, 33(2), 106-113.
Michel, M. C., Bischoff, A., & Jakobs, K. H., 2002. Comparison of problem- and lecture-based pharmacology teaching. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 23(4), 168-170.
Woods, D., 2000. Problem-based learning: An overview. In D. Boud & G. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp. 3-11). Kogan Page.
Schmidt, H. G., Van der Molen, H. T., Te Winkel, W., & Wijnen, W., 2007. Constructivist teaching in medical education: A review. Medical Education, 41(6), 573-581.
Bradshaw, P., & Mackenzie, D., 2017. Small group teaching in MBBS: Enhancing clinical skills and knowledge retention. BMC Medical Education, 17(1), 40.
Litchfield, A., & Jones, M.,2016. Impact of small group teaching in MBBS: Improving learning outcomes. Medical Education Journal, 50(4), 392-399.
Kumar, S., & Sharma, P., 2018. Small group learning in MBBS: Promoting collaborative and independent learning. Indian Journal of Medical Education, 19(2), 101-107.
Alavi, M. S., Khodadadi, E., & Yazdani, M., 2015. Comparison of the effectiveness of traditional lecture and active learning methods in nursing education: A systematic review. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 5(2), 1-8.
McLaughlin, J. E., Ghent, L., Hatcher, A. M., et al., 2014. The flipped classroom: A course redesign to foster learning and engagement in the health sciences. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 26(1), 7-10.
Cook, D. A., Artino, A. R., Durning, S. J., et al., 2010. What do we know about the effects of educational technology on medical students' learning? Medical Education, 44(8), 760-767.
Granger, B., Schoonover, G., Bonham, A., et al., 2017. Active learning strategies for teaching medical students: A meta-analysis. Medical Education, 51(6), 633-645.
Hardin, K. A., & Regehr, G., 2004. The impact of multimedia on medical students' learning: A review of the literature. Medical Education, 38(2), 202-211.
Alkhateeb, J. M., Dallaghan, G. L., Papp, K. K., et al., 2019. The impact of shorter teaching sessions on student engagement and learning outcomes in medical education. Medical Teacher, 41(1), 16-22.
Mahajan, A., Sood, R., Malhotra, S., et al., 2018. Awareness and perceptions of problem-based learning among medical students: A cross-sectional study. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 9, 307-314.
Tuckett, A., Janke, R., Black, K., et al.,2013. Student awareness and use of technology-enhanced learning in medical education: A survey of Australian medical students. Medical Teacher, 35(4), 330-335.
Ramya, C., Sandhya, V. K., Ramya, P., Renuka, I. V., Atchyuta, M., Anusha, M., Garima, B., & Meghana, B., 2020. A study on perception of students regarding newer teaching methods in medical education. Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research, 14(8).
Al-Kadri, H., Al-Turki, S., Al-Saadi, T., et al.,2016. Team-based learning and e-learning in medical education: Awareness and perceptions of Saudi medical students. BMC Medical Education, 16, 41.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
