Student perspectives regarding the move towards student‐centered learning in the anatomy laboratory
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In the compressed (<50 hrs) anatomy component of the University of Ottawa's MD Program, most time is devoted to laboratories that emphasize active learning in small groups with tutors that facilitate student‐driven education. A recent (2014) program evaluation study determined that students perceived the following: (i) the active learning environment was highly variable between groups, and was at times limited by teacher‐centered approaches; and (ii) a lack of direction and feedback was perceived by some to be a consequence of the emphasis on student‐centered learning. In light of these perceptions, the following changes were made in 2015–16: (i) there was increased training for tutors and a reduction in tutor‐to‐student ratio, to promote effective guided inquiry during lab sessions; (ii) itemized checklists were provided to add direction and structure to self‐directed learning; and (iii) online formative quizzes were provided so that students could gain insight and feedback regarding their progress. First and second year (M1 and M2) student feedback regarding the program and the tutors from the 2015–16 academic year was quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed to determine whether these changes effectively responded to student concerns, and assessment data was characterized to determine any impact on learning. Both M1 and M2 students indicated strong value for the formative quizzes, with 96% of students utilizing these resources. All students also noted satisfaction with the itemized checklists, and perceived that these resources facilitated self‐directed study in class time and provided guidance during exam preparation. In particular, M2 students (who experienced their first year labs without these tools) felt less reliant on tutor support and more certain regarding achievement of the learning objectives. While M1 students expressed strong satisfaction with the active learning environment, M2 students expressed some concern with the increased emphasis on student‐centered learning, and perceived their learning was impaired with the reduction in tutors. However, analysis of assessment data indicated that, in all regards (in‐lab quizzes and examinations), performance of M1 and M2 in 2015–16 was not adversely affected, relative to data from previous years (2012–2015). In conclusion, students generally highly rated the shift further along the student‐centered learning spectrum. Despite some concerns of students accustomed to more Faculty support, increased emphasis on student‐centered learning did not impair academic performance. Support or Funding Information University of Ottawa, Faculty of Medicine Summer Studentship Program (Innovation in Medical Education)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,024 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».