Comparison of Online Peer-Assisted Learning and Faculty-Led Teaching for Short Answer Questions

IF 1.4 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL

Clinical Teacher Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1111/tct.70069

Gurtek Singh Samra, Kashmir Gaddu, Joseph Ryan Wong Sik Hee, Krupali Brahmbhatt, David Bowrey, Max Seabrook

{"title":"Comparison of Online Peer-Assisted Learning and Faculty-Led Teaching for Short Answer Questions","authors":"Gurtek Singh Samra, Kashmir Gaddu, Joseph Ryan Wong Sik Hee, Krupali Brahmbhatt, David Bowrey, Max Seabrook","doi":"10.1111/tct.70069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Peer-assisted learning (PAL) is a well-recognised pedagogical approach in medical education; however, research on its effectiveness in online settings remains limited. Multiple-choice questions have been the predominant method for assessing PAL outcomes, despite Short Answer Questions (SAQs) being the superior tool for evaluating knowledge. This study compares online peer and faculty teaching in enhancing medical students' higher-order thinking skills and assesses students' perceptions of these methods.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Third-year medical students undergoing surgical placements were consented and recruited for the study. Three pre-defined cohorts were randomised to the following arms: no intervention (<i>n</i> = 41), online PAL teaching (<i>n</i> = 37) and online faculty teaching (<i>n</i> = 35). Peer teaching was delivered by fourth-year students (<i>n</i> = 6) and faculty teaching by Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) (<i>n</i> = 6). Academic outcomes were assessed using end-of-block SAQ formatives, and teaching quality was evaluated using the validated SEEQ questionnaire. Knowledge gain and self-perceived confidence were assessed through pre- and post-session tests, validated with a reference group of learners.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Consent for SAQ exam scores was obtained from <i>n</i> = 19 (no intervention), <i>n</i> = 29 (PAL) and <i>n</i> = 21 (CTF). No significant differences were seen between the groups (<i>p</i> = 0.650). SEEQ completion was <i>n</i> = 24 (PAL) and <i>n</i> = 30 (CTF). CTF tutors received significantly higher ratings in domains of <i>Learning</i> (<i>p</i> = 0.017) and <i>Group Interaction</i> (<i>p</i> = 0.036). Pre- and post-session tests showed no significant differences in scores (<i>p</i> = 0.957) or self-perceived confidence ratings (<i>p</i> = 0.454).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>This study shows that online PAL is a viable alternative to faculty-led teaching for enhancing SAQ skills and knowledge acquisition. However, faculty-led teaching offers a superior educational experience.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47324,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Teacher","volume":"22 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/tct.70069","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tct.70069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Peer-assisted learning (PAL) is a well-recognised pedagogical approach in medical education; however, research on its effectiveness in online settings remains limited. Multiple-choice questions have been the predominant method for assessing PAL outcomes, despite Short Answer Questions (SAQs) being the superior tool for evaluating knowledge. This study compares online peer and faculty teaching in enhancing medical students' higher-order thinking skills and assesses students' perceptions of these methods.

Methods

Third-year medical students undergoing surgical placements were consented and recruited for the study. Three pre-defined cohorts were randomised to the following arms: no intervention (n = 41), online PAL teaching (n = 37) and online faculty teaching (n = 35). Peer teaching was delivered by fourth-year students (n = 6) and faculty teaching by Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) (n = 6). Academic outcomes were assessed using end-of-block SAQ formatives, and teaching quality was evaluated using the validated SEEQ questionnaire. Knowledge gain and self-perceived confidence were assessed through pre- and post-session tests, validated with a reference group of learners.

Results

Consent for SAQ exam scores was obtained from n = 19 (no intervention), n = 29 (PAL) and n = 21 (CTF). No significant differences were seen between the groups (p = 0.650). SEEQ completion was n = 24 (PAL) and n = 30 (CTF). CTF tutors received significantly higher ratings in domains of Learning (p = 0.017) and Group Interaction (p = 0.036). Pre- and post-session tests showed no significant differences in scores (p = 0.957) or self-perceived confidence ratings (p = 0.454).

Conclusion

This study shows that online PAL is a viable alternative to faculty-led teaching for enhancing SAQ skills and knowledge acquisition. However, faculty-led teaching offers a superior educational experience.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Clinical Teacher MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-

CiteScore

2.90

自引率

5.60%

发文量

113

期刊介绍： The Clinical Teacher has been designed with the active, practising clinician in mind. It aims to provide a digest of current research, practice and thinking in medical education presented in a readable, stimulating and practical style. The journal includes sections for reviews of the literature relating to clinical teaching bringing authoritative views on the latest thinking about modern teaching. There are also sections on specific teaching approaches, a digest of the latest research published in Medical Education and other teaching journals, reports of initiatives and advances in thinking and practical teaching from around the world, and expert community and discussion on challenging and controversial issues in today"s clinical education.