Evaluation of Web-based Computer-aided Instruction in a Basic Science Course

Abstract

This study demonstrates an important advantage of web-based applications to collect and evaluate CAI utilization efficiently and objectively at both the level of the class and the level of the individual student.

Evaluation of computer‐aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: A six‐year study

“…Finally, the level of CAI use is associated with performance on examinations. The finding that CAI utilization among students was highly variable confirms earlier reports (McNulty et al, 2000;Coates and Humphreys., 2001;McNulty et al, 2004;. This variability, combined with year-to-year variations in some CAI utilization, greatly affected analysis of the data and emphasizes a limitation of the study.…”

“…The results of the survey in the final year of the study correlated reasonably well with the server logs except for the 10-15% discrepancies. This level of discrepancy between server data and student responses has been reported previously (McNulty et al, 2000;. From the student survey, two reasons given for not accessing the CAI (technical problems and time) could have been addressed with sufficient motivation.…”

“…This adoption of technology into the classroom was accelerated with expansion of the Web, which elevated the level of innovation and collaboration in the development of educational applications by making it easier for faculty to author, distribute and update courseware (Candler and Blair, 1998;McNulty et al, 2000;Levine, 2002;Nieder and Nagy, 2002). The rapid increase in the development of web-based computer-aided instruction (CAI) and the availability of content databases provide easy access to educational materials that enhance a student's ability to learn.…”

Are Multimedia Resources Effective in Life Science Education? A Meta-Analysis

“…Four papers had no comparison or control group and did not measure a learning gain (Adamczyk, 2009;Blake, 2003;Dantas, 2008;McAteer, 1996); three evaluated an inappropriate student population (Dunsworth, 2007;McLean, 2005;Corton, 2006); eight had incomplete and/or irretrievable data (Fawver, 1990;Garg, 2002;Stith, 2004;McFarlin, 2008;Kohlmeier, 2003;Goldberg, 2000;Petersson, 2009 andGuy, 1992). Three other papers were also excluded on the basis of being a single-cohort study with no comparison to either a control group or as part of a before-and-after design (Dewhurst, 2000;McNulty, 2000;McNulty, 2004). Three papers were an evaluation of online delivery without a comparison group (Buchowski, 2010;Rawson, 2002;and Kohlmeier, 2000).…”

De effectiviteit van e-learning en de implementatie in het medisch onderwijs

“…17 Wanneer studenten worden beoordeeld op kennis van de inhoud van de programma's verhoogt dit het gebruik sterk; een effect dat ook in onderzoek is aangetoond. 18 Uit evaluaties blijkt dat studenten de EL programma's (zeer) positief waarderen; de flexibele beschikbaarheid, het multimediale karakter en de interactieve vragen vinden ze erg leerzaam. 19 Tijdens de klinische fase en de medische vervolgopleidingen is de implementatie van EL aanzienlijk minder.…”