Document Type : Original Article
Authors
Avalon University School of Medicine (AUSOM), Willemstad, Curacao
Abstract
Introduction: There are two popular methods of clinical skills teaching. One is Peyton’s method, and the other one is Robert Gagne’s method. A hybrid model which is a combination of both teaching methods is developed and implemented at Avalon University School of Medicine in Clinical Skills. The aim of the study was to evaluate the hybrid model of clinical skills teaching.
Methods: This is a quasi-experimental study where a control group with a sample size of 26 was compared with two study groups; one group included 24 participants, and as the other one consisting of 16 subjects selected without randomization. All students in the class were included in the study, except for those withdrew voluntarily. The quantitative data were gathered in the form of a questionnaire on the Likert scale which was collected as the end of course evaluations. The quantitative data for the responses on the Likert scale was analyzed for descriptive statistics: Mean, Median, and Mode. The quantitative data also included the students’ performance on assessments of clinical skills which was analyzed using ANOVA test. The qualitative data were gathered in the form of open-ended questions in the end of course evaluations. The qualitative data were also collected from the faculty members who were the examiners for the clinical skills course as the feedback taken from them.
Results: There was a significant improvement in the feedback of students (end of course evaluations) after implementing the hybrid model of clinical skills teaching which was shown by increased Mean, Median, Mode for the most pointers on the Likert scale. Also, there was a notable improvement in the performance of students with a significant p-value (p<0.05) on ANOVA test.
Conclusion: The hybrid model is very effective in teaching clinical skills. This teaching method can be evaluated by replicating this study at larger institutions with more number of students.
Keywords
London: FAIMER Centre for Distance Learning,
CenMEDIC; 2017.
2. Race P, Brown S. The Lecturer’s Toolkit. London:
Kogan Page; 1998.
3. Peyton JWR. Teaching and Learning in Medical
Practice. Rickmansworth: Manticore Europe; 1998.
4. Gagné RM. The Conditions of Learning. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1977.
5. Horton B. ‘I hear and I forget, I see and I remember,
I do and I understand’ - putting learning models into
practice. Planet. 2001; 3(1): 12-4.
6. Cleland JA, Abe K, Rethans J. the use of simulated
patients in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 42.
Med Teach. 2009; 31(6): 477-86.
7. LaRochelle JS, Dong T, Durning SJ. Preclerkship
assessment of clinical skills and clinical reasoning:
the longitudinal impact on student performance. Mil
Med. 2015; 180 (4 Suppl):43-6.
8. Kirkpatrick DL. Evaluating training programmes:
The four levels. Philadelphia: Berrett-Koehler; 1998.
9. Kirkpatrick DL. Techniques for evaluation programs
-Part 2: Learning. Journal of the American Society of
Training Directors. 1959; 13(12): 21-6.
10. Norcini,J, Burch V. Workplace-based assessment as
an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 3. Med Teach.
2007; 29: 855–71.
competence/performance. Acad Med. 1990; 65: 563-7.
12. Von Glasersfeld E. Radical constructivism: A way of
knowing and learning. London & Washington: The
Falmer Press; 1995.
13. Von Glaserfeld E. Constructivism in education. New
York: Pergamon Press; 1989.
14. Kolb DA. Experiential Learning: Experience as
the Source of Learning and Development. London:
Prentice-Hall; 1984.
15. Dongre A, Robinson C. Learning in the community.
London: FAIMER Centre for Distance Learning,
CenMEDIC; 2017.
16. Eldin M, Magzoub A, Schmidt HG. A taxonomy of
community-based medical education. Acad Med. 2000;
75(7): 699-707.
)