Evaluation of interactive teaching for undergraduate medical students using a classroom interactive response system in India.

BACKGROUND The classical didactic lecture has been the cornerstone of the theoretical undergraduate medical education. Their efficacy however reduces due to reduced interaction and short attention span of the students. It is hypothesized that the interactive response pad obviates some of these drawbacks. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an interactive response system by comparing it with conventional classroom teaching. METHODS A prospective comparative longitudinal study was conducted on 192 students who were exposed to either conventional or interactive teaching over 20 classes. Pre-test, Post-test and retentions test (post 8-12 weeks) scores were collated and statistically analysed. An independent observer measured number of student interactions in each class. RESULTS Pre-test scores from both groups were similar (p = 0.71). There was significant improvement in both post test scores when compared to pre-test scores in either method (p < 0.001). The interactive post-test score was better than conventional post test score (p < 0.001) by 8-10% (95% CI-difference of means - 8.2%-9.24%-10.3%). The interactive retention test score was better than conventional retention test score (p < 0.001) by 15-18% (95% CI-difference of means - 15.0%-16.64%-18.2%). There were 51 participative events in the interactive group vs 25 in the conventional group. CONCLUSIONS The Interactive Response Pad method was efficacious in teaching. Students taught with the interactive method were likely to score 8-10% higher (statistically significant) in the immediate post class time and 15-18% higher (statistically significant) after 8-12 weeks. The number of student-teacher interactions increases when using the interactive response pads.

[1]  Nicole Mareno,et al.  The Use of Audience Response Systems in Nursing Education: Best Practice Guidelines , 2010, International journal of nursing education scholarship.

[2]  T Eric Schackow,et al.  Audience response system: effect on learning in family medicine residents. , 2004, Family medicine.

[3]  Joseph Kee-Yin Ng,et al.  Do Not Turn off Your Mobile Phones in My Lectures – A Mobile Phone Based Response System , 2008 .

[4]  T. Chiu,et al.  A multinational randomised study comparing didactic lectures with case scenario in a severe sepsis medical simulation course , 2011, Emergency Medicine Journal.

[5]  Frederick S Southwick,et al.  Theodore E. Woodward Award: spare me the PowerPoint and bring back the medical textbook. , 2007, Transactions of the American Clinical and Climatological Association.

[6]  A. Kimball,et al.  Teaching empathy to undergraduate medical students using a temporary tattoo simulating psoriasis. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[7]  Jeff Cain,et al.  A primer on audience response systems: current applications and future considerations. , 2008, American journal of pharmaceutical education.

[8]  C Grieve,et al.  Knowledge increment assessed for three methodologies of teaching physiology. , 1992, Medical teacher.

[9]  B. Schreiber,et al.  Live lecture versus video podcast in undergraduate medical education: A randomised controlled trial , 2010, BMC medical education.

[10]  Charles R. Graham,et al.  Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems , 2007 .

[11]  Yvonne Steinert,et al.  Interactive lecturing: strategies for increasing participation in large group presentations , 1999 .

[12]  Anna Carlin,et al.  Waking the Dead: Using interactive technology to engage passive listeners in the classroom , 2004, AMCIS.

[13]  GRACIELA E. SILVA,et al.  Effectiveness of an Audience Response System in Teaching Pharmacology to Baccalaureate Nursing Students , 2011, Computers, informatics, nursing : CIN.

[14]  Student-Involved Demonstration Approach to Teach the Physiology of Vestibular Apparatus for Undergraduate Medical Students , 2011, Teaching and learning in medicine.

[15]  Jeegisha Patel,et al.  Using game format in small group classes for pharmacotherapeutics case studies. , 2008, American journal of pharmaceutical education.

[16]  A. Troyer,et al.  CHLORPROPAMIDE POISONING AND DIABETES INSIPIDUS , 1975, The Lancet.

[17]  Wendy Beekes The ‘Millionaire’ method for encouraging participation , 2006 .

[18]  Cande V Ananth,et al.  The influence of an audience response system on knowledge retention: an application to resident education. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[19]  Kirsten Crossgrove,et al.  Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material. , 2008, CBE life sciences education.

[20]  G. Tataronis,et al.  Click it: assessment of classroom response systems in physician assistant education. , 2011, Journal of allied health.

[21]  E. Palmer,et al.  Assessment of an electronic voting system within the tutorial setting: A randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN54535861] , 2005, BMC medical education.

[22]  J. Stuart,et al.  MEDICAL STUDENT CONCENTRATION DURING LECTURES , 1978, The Lancet.

[23]  K. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Effect of personal response systems on student perception and academic performance in courses in a health sciences curriculum. , 2011, Advances in physiology education.

[24]  M. Brackbill,et al.  Teaching electrocardiogram basics using dance and movement. , 2009, American journal of pharmaceutical education.