The Effects of Case-Based Team Learning on Students' Learning, Self Regulation and Self Direction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The application of the best approaches to teach adults in medical education is important in the process of training learners to become and remain effective health care providers. This research aims at designing and integrating two approaches, namely team teaching and case study and tries to examine the consequences of these approaches on learning, self regulation and self direction of nursing students. MATERIAL & METHODS: This is a quasi experimental study of 40 students who were taking a course on mental health. The lessons were designed by using two educational techniques: short case based study and team based learning. Data gathering was based on two valid and reliable questionnaires: Self-Directed Readiness Scale (SDLRS) and the self-regulating questionnaire. Open ended questions were also designed for the evaluation of students' with points of view on educational methods. RESULTS: The Results showed an increase in the students' self directed learning based on their performance on the post-test. The results showed that the students' self-directed learning increased after the intervention. The mean difference before and after intervention self management was statistically significant (p=0.0001). Also, self-regulated learning increased with the mean difference after intervention (p=0.001). Other results suggested that case based team learning can have significant effects on increasing students' learning (p=0.003). CONCLUSION: This article may be of value to medical educators who wish to replace traditional learning with informal learning (student-centered-active learning), so as to enhance not only the students' knowledge, but also the advancement of long- life learning skills.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".