Hybrid Versus Traditional Teaching in the Subject Of Anatomy: A Comparison Based On Results Of Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v74i2.10879Keywords:
MEDICAL EDUCATION, ANATOMY, MODULAR, ASSESSMENTAbstract
Objective: To assess the results of hybrid and traditional teaching systems and their implementation based on student
evaluation in anatomy.
Study Design: Cross-sectional study.
Place and Duration of Study: Anatomy Department, Central Park Medical College, Lahore Pakistan, from Jun 2022 to Jun
2023.
Methodology: The study was conducted on the first-year medical students of 2021 who were taught via integrated modular
systems at the level of temporal coordination. Teaching strategies were changed from didactic lectures to interactive largegroup lectures and small-group discussions. The results of their continuous assessment and professional exams were
compared and analysed.
Results: The proportion of failed students in the Modular-Group was 20.8%, whereas 79.2% in the Non-Modular-Group. The
learning system was statistically significantly related to performance in professional exams. A significant difference exists
between internal assessment and professional exam scores of students in traditional and modular teaching. The relationship
between the results of internal assessment and professional exams was highly positive (r=0.79) and statistically significant
(p<0.001).
Conclusion: Students' performance was better in assessment throughout the year in the traditional system, whereas the
professional exam results were better in the modular system.
Downloads
References
Vallée A, Blacher J, Cariou A, Sorbets E. Blended Learning
Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education:
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Med Internet Res 2020;
(8): e16504. https://doi.org/10.2196/16504
Hitzblech T, Maaz A, Rollinger T, Ludwig S, Dettmer S, Wurl W,
et al. The modular curriculum of medicine at the Charité Berlin -
a project report based on an across-semester student evaluation.
GMS J Med Educ 2019; 36(5): 54.
https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001262
Samarakoon L, Fernando T, Rodrigo C, Rajapakse S. Learning
styles and approaches to learning among medical undergraduates and postgraduates. BMC Med Educ 2013; 13(1): 1-6
https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-42
Maaz A, Hitzblech T, Arends P, Degel A, Ludwig S,
Mossakowski A et al. Moving a mountain: Practical insights into
mastering a major curriculum reform at a large European
medical university. Med Teach 2018; 40(5): 453-460.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2018.1440077
Karthikeyan K, Kumar A. Integrated modular teaching in
dermatology for undergraduate students: A novel approach.
Indian Dermatol Online J 2014; 5(3): 266-270.
https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-5178.137774
Srikanth S, Thirunaaukarasu, Behera B, Mahajan P. Modular
teaching: an alternative to routine teaching method for undergraduate medical students. Indian J Community Med 2011;
(3): 237-238. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-0218.86529
Fatima U, Naz M, Zafar H, Fatima A, Khan RR. Student's
perception about Modular teaching and various instructional
strategies in the subject of Obstetrics and Gynecology.
Professional Med J 2020; 27(01): 40-45.
https://doi.org/10.29309/TPMJ/2019.27.01.3162
Dejene W. The practice of modularized curriculum in higher
education institution: Active learning and continuous
assessment in focus. Cogent Educ 2019; 6(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1611052
Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical
education: AMEE Guide No. 96. Med Teach 2015; 37(4): 312-322.
https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2014.970998
Gahutu JB. Physiology teaching and learning experience in a
new modular curriculum at the National University of Rwanda.
Adv Physiol Educ 2010; 34(1): 11-14.
https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00093.2009
Uneeb SN, Zainab S, Khoso A, Basit A. Knowledge scores in
annual and modular curriculum among medical students from
Karachi, Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc 2021; 71(2(B)): 681-685.
https://doi.org/10.47391/JPMA.1416
Owolabi J, Bekele A. Implementation of Innovative Educational
Technologies in Teaching of Anatomy and Basic Medical
Sciences During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Developing
Country: The COVID-19 Silver Lining? Adv Med Educ Pract
; 12: 619-625. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S295239
Boscolo-Berto R, Tortorella C, Porzionato A, Stecco C, Picardi
EEE, Macchi V, et al. The additional role of virtual to traditional
dissection in teaching anatomy: a randomised controlled trial.
Surg Radiol Anat 2021; 43(4): 469-479.
https://doi.org/0.1007/s00276-020-02551-2
Munir R, Ghafoor N, Niazi IM, Saeed I, Yousaf A. Approach of
MBBS Students receiving Modular vs Students receiving
Conventional Mode of education towards Health Research: A
Comparative Study. J Rawalpindi Med Coll 2021; 25(3): 328-32.
https://doi.org/10.37939/jrmc.v25i3.1456
Allison S, Mueller C, Lackey-Cornelison W. Structure and
function: how to design integrated anatomy and physiology
modules for the gross anatomy laboratory. Front Physiol 2023;
: 1250139. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1250139
Brooks WS, Woodley KT, Jackson JR, Hoesley CJ. Integration of
gross anatomy in an organ system-based medical curriculum:
strategies and challenges. Anat Sci Educ 2015; 8(3): 266-274
https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1483
Haque A, Mansoor S, Malik F, Ahmed J, Haque Z. Comparison
of Quality of Life of Medical Students in Annual and Modular
System in Public Sector Medical Colleges in Karachi, Pakistan.
Int J Med Stud;10(3):258–263.
https://doi.org/10.5195/ijms.2022.1028
Junaidi I. Medical Colleges divided over integrated modular
curriculum.[Internet] DAWN. 2018
https://www.dawn.com/news/1391487/medical-collegesdivided-over-integrated-modular-curriculum (Accessed on June
, 2023)
Serrat MA, Dom AM, Buchanan JT Jr, Williams AR, Efaw ML,
Richardson LL, et al. Independent learning modules enhance
student performance and understanding of anatomy. Anat Sci
Educ 2014; 7(5): 406-416. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.143
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
