1 Coordinator Medical Education Unit, Department of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College & Research Institute, Ammapettai, Chennai, India

2 Department of Ophthalmology, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College & Research Institute, Ammapettai, Chennai, India


Introduction: In spite of the fact that microteaching has beenpracticed extensively in most universities, its actual efficacyhas not been studied systematically. In this study, there was anattempt to quantify the efficacy of microteaching in inducingbehavioral change in teachers. We also aimed to determine theperceived utility and ease of this process in teacher training,using the feedback received from the participants. This feedbackalong with efficacy can collectively predict the effectiveness ofmicroteaching.Methods: A prospective experimental study was designed using aconvenient sample of 30 faculty volunteers. After the institutionalethics committee approval, the videos of pre-microteaching andpost-microteaching sessions from the 30 participants undergoing 5sessions of microteaching were graded with a seven point teachingcompetency scale and the participant’s perceived usefulness andperceived ease of use was studied using a validated questionnaire.Paired sample t-test was used to determine the efficacy of the study.Results: Microteaching showed a statistically significantimprovement among the behavior of the participants after fivesessions of microteaching. All the parameters in the scale showeda statistically significant improvement. Though the participantsfelt that this method was useful, the majority of them felt it is avery time consuming process requiring resources.Conclusion: Hence, the overall effectiveness in in-serviceteaching process was limited for microteaching in this currentscenario; though microteaching induced positive behaviourchange, it was time consuming and also it was difficult to arrangea peer group to enrole.Keywords: Microteaching, Efficacy, Usefulness, Effectiveness, Teacher training

  1. Singh T. Microteaching revisited. Natl Med J India. 2011; 24: 363–4.
  2. Srinivasan M, Li ST, Meyers FJ, Pratt DD, Collins JB, Braddock C, Skeff KM, West DC, Henderson M, Hales RE, Hilty DM. “Teaching as a competency”: Competencies for medical educators. Academic Medicine. 2011; 86(10): 1211-20.
  3. Fortune JC, Cooper JM, Allen DW. The Stanford summer micro-teaching clinic. Journal of Teacher Education. 1967; 18(4): 389-93.
  4. Perlberg A, Peri JN, Weinreb M, Nitzan E, Shimron J. Microteaching and videotape recordings: a new approach to improving teaching. Academic Medicine. 1972; 47(1): 43-50.
  5. Turney C. Micro-Teaching—A Promising Innovation in Teacher Education. Australian Journal of Education. 1970 Jun 1; 14(2):125-41.
  6. Cooper JM. Developing specific teaching skills through micro-teaching. The High School Journal. 1967; 51(2): 80-5.
  7. Amanda G. Mergler & D. Tangen. Using microteaching to enhance teacher efficacy in pre‐service teachers, Teaching Education.2010; 21(2), 199-210, DOI: 10.1080/10476210902998466
  8. Perlberg A. Microteaching. International Review of Education. 1972; 18(1): 547-60.
  9. Allen DW, Eve AW. Microteaching. Theory into practice. 1968; 7(5): 181-5.
  10. Chen Q, Zeng F and Yang Z. Study on the Effects of Multimedia Monitoring System in Medical Teachers’ Microteaching Training. Computer and information science. 2010; 3(2): 241- 243
  11. Burnard P. Using video as a reflective tool in interpersonal skills training. Nurse Education Today. 1991; 11(2):143–146