Improving student learning outcomes and perception through a blended learning strategy based on virtual microscopy for teaching a histology laboratory course.

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Yanmin Zhang, Chunyang Li, Chan Zhou
{"title":"Improving student learning outcomes and perception through a blended learning strategy based on virtual microscopy for teaching a histology laboratory course.","authors":"Yanmin Zhang, Chunyang Li, Chan Zhou","doi":"10.1152/advan.00058.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While light microscopy (LM) and virtual microscopy (VM) are valuable pedagogical approaches in histology education, studies comparing their effectiveness have primarily emanated from North America. This research aimed to compare the performance, satisfaction, and perception of Chinese undergraduate dental students enrolled in a histology laboratory course using a blended learning approach (LM+VM) versus traditional LM learning. A total of 182 first-year students were divided into two groups with similar age, gender, and academic backgrounds. The LM+VM group received a blended learning curriculum combining LM and VM, while the LM-only group participated in traditional LM-based learning. The students in the blended learning group achieved a significantly higher mean score on the laboratory exam than the students in the traditional learning group (LM+VM 79.36 ± 10.11 vs. LM-only 74.76 ± 14.71; degrees of freedom (df) = 180, P = 0.01). Additionally, the LM+VM group had a lower failure rate (i.e., grade F for students scoring below 60) (3.23% [LM+VM] vs. 13.48% [LM-only], P = 0.02). The implementation of VM was well-received by students in the LM+VM group, who, while disagreeing that VM could entirely replace LM, overwhelmingly preferred the blended learning model (93.55%). Furthermore, students in the LM+VM group reported higher satisfaction levels compared to the LM-only group (t = 8.49, df = 180, P < 0.001). Overall, blended learning with LM and VM resulted in significant improvements in student performance, satisfaction, and perception compared to traditional LM learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00058.2024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While light microscopy (LM) and virtual microscopy (VM) are valuable pedagogical approaches in histology education, studies comparing their effectiveness have primarily emanated from North America. This research aimed to compare the performance, satisfaction, and perception of Chinese undergraduate dental students enrolled in a histology laboratory course using a blended learning approach (LM+VM) versus traditional LM learning. A total of 182 first-year students were divided into two groups with similar age, gender, and academic backgrounds. The LM+VM group received a blended learning curriculum combining LM and VM, while the LM-only group participated in traditional LM-based learning. The students in the blended learning group achieved a significantly higher mean score on the laboratory exam than the students in the traditional learning group (LM+VM 79.36 ± 10.11 vs. LM-only 74.76 ± 14.71; degrees of freedom (df) = 180, P = 0.01). Additionally, the LM+VM group had a lower failure rate (i.e., grade F for students scoring below 60) (3.23% [LM+VM] vs. 13.48% [LM-only], P = 0.02). The implementation of VM was well-received by students in the LM+VM group, who, while disagreeing that VM could entirely replace LM, overwhelmingly preferred the blended learning model (93.55%). Furthermore, students in the LM+VM group reported higher satisfaction levels compared to the LM-only group (t = 8.49, df = 180, P < 0.001). Overall, blended learning with LM and VM resulted in significant improvements in student performance, satisfaction, and perception compared to traditional LM learning.

在组织学实验课程教学中采用基于虚拟显微镜的混合学习策略,提高学生的学习成果和感知能力。
尽管光学显微镜(LM)和虚拟显微镜(VM)是组织学教学中很有价值的教学方法,但比较其有效性的研究主要来自北美。本研究旨在比较中国口腔医学本科生在组织学实验课程中使用混合学习方法(LM+VM)与传统 LM 学习的成绩、满意度和感知。182名一年级学生被分为年龄、性别和学术背景相似的两组。LM+VM组接受了LM和VM相结合的混合学习课程,而仅LM组则参加了基于LM的传统学习。混合学习组学生的实验考试平均成绩明显高于传统学习组学生(LM+VM 79.36 ± 10.11 vs. LM-only 74.76 ± 14.71;自由度 (df) = 180,P = 0.01)。此外,LM+VM 组的不及格率(即分数低于 60 分的 F 级学生)较低(3.23% [LM+VM] vs. 13.48% [纯 LM],P = 0.02)。虚拟机的实施受到了 LM+VM 组学生的欢迎,他们虽然不同意虚拟机可以完全取代 LM,但绝大多数都更喜欢混合学习模式(93.55%)。此外,与纯 LM 组相比,LM+VM 组学生的满意度更高(t = 8.49,df = 180,P < 0.001)。总体而言,与传统的 LM 学习相比,LM 和 VM 混合学习在学生成绩、满意度和感知方面都有显著提高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
19.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信