It’s what you do, not the way you do it – online versus face-to-face small group teaching in first year medical school

Abstract

Background Major disruptions imposed on medical education by the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid shift to online teaching in medical programs, necessitated need for evaluation of this format. In this study we directly compared knowledge outcomes, social outcomes, and wellbeing of first year student small group teaching in either face to face (f2f) or online format. Methods At the end of the first course of our medical program, students were invited to participate in an online questionnaire with 10 quantitative items and 1 qualitative item. These were analysed using Factor Analysis Pattern Matrix and linear regression to group items and assess relatedness. Qualitative responses were thematized using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA). Summative assessment results were compared, both between current cohorts to historical cohorts. Results From a cohort of 298 students there was a 77% response rate. Overall, there were no differences in knowledge gains, either between groups or when compared to historical cohorts. Questionnaire items fell reliably into groups that related to either learning outcomes, social outcomes, or wellbeing. Independent T tests showed that format for teaching (online versus f2f) had an impact on social outcomes but no direct impact on learning outcomes. Linear regression revealed that the social outcomes have a direct impact on wellbeing and almost the double the impact on learning outcomes than mode of learning i.e.. F2f or online (β = .448 and β = .232 respectively). Conclusion In this study, we were able to show with statistical strength that social outcomes for students such as engaging with peers and facilitator, contributing to the group, and making friends have a direct impact on wellbeing and indirectly impact learning outcomes (such as motivation, satisfaction, integration of knowledge). In a rapidly changing educational landscape, in our opinion, it is vital that these aspects are a focus of design and delivery of medical education. The data from this study supports the notion that activity design and the expertise of the teacher in facilitating the small group activities, has greater impact than the mode of educational delivery itself on students’ learning processes.

An online case-based teaching and assessment program on clinical history-taking skills and reasoning using simulated patients in response to the COVID-19 pandemic

“…Used in this way, constructive feedback can both reinforce and adapt behaviours, prompting reflection and improving student performance [ 27 ]. Other groups that have implemented small group teaching programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated no impact on learning outcomes of students when engaging in online learning compared to face-to-face learning [ 28 , 29 ].…”

“…Other groups that have implemented small group teaching programmes during the COVID-19 pandemic have demonstrated no impact on learning outcomes of students when engaging in online learning compared to face-to-face learning [28,29].…”

Evaluation of class participation in non-face-to-face CPR training for medical students

“…Stable accessibility to devices—such as a computer or mobile phone—online learning platforms, and newly developed content have been indicated to yield better learning effects in an NFF than FF environment [ 18 ]. NFF learning can provide several benefits to learners, including convenience, time saving, flexibility of scheduling, and improving group interaction through chat function [ 2 , 19 ]. Moreover, asynchronous NFF learning, as a mode of self-learning, can provide an easier and more effective access to a wider variety and greater quantity of information, as well as providing a personalized approach to learning, with learners having greater control over the educational content, learning sequence, and time spent [ 2 ].…”

Investigating an online learning service management on students’ learning activeness: A Rasch model analysis

“…This can be due to the balance between online and face-to-face learning. In online learning, teachers can use various learning media and with face-to-face learning students and teachers can interact directly for material that is not understood when online learning (Di Giacomo & Di Paolo, 2021;Marín-Díaz et al, 2021;Torda & Shulruf, 2021). In PJHS Z, full online learning has the highest percentage where many data sources use full online learning.…”