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