Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  Users Online: 499 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 211-214

Is “modular” the way to go for small group learning in community medicine in undergraduate clinical postings?


Department of Community Medicine (PSM), GMERS Medical College and General Hospital, Vadodara, Gujarat, India

Correspondence Address:
Paragkumar Chavda
Department of Community Medicine (PSM), GMERS Medical College and General Hospital, 1st Floor, College Building, Gotri, Vadodara - 390 021, Gujarat
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2229-516X.186970

Rights and Permissions

Context: There is a need to shift from the didactic lecture-based instruction to more student-centered active learning methods for undergraduate teaching in community medicine. Aims: To compare didactic and modular method of learning on Level 1 and 2 on Kirkpatrick's training evaluation model. Settings and Design: This was a two-arm educational intervention study for a small group of the 2nd year MBBS students in their 4th semester during clinical posting in the subject of community medicine. Subjects and Methods: The topic chosen was “rabies prophylaxis” in the 2nd clinical posting during 4th semester. With permission from Institutional Ethics Committee, first batch of 17 students was taught this topic by didactic method. Next batch of 22 students was taught by the modular method. A self-reading module was prepared for this study and validated by three teachers. What was different in modular teaching was a circular sitting arrangement, module reading by students, video presentation, and exercise using case vignettes. Statistical Analysis Used: Student's t-test was used for pre- and post-test score comparison and Mann–Whitney U-test for students' responses on Likert scale. Results: The mean gain in obtained marks after modular learning (7.9/15) was significantly higher as compared to gain after didactic teaching (5.9/15) (P = 0.0038); more students asserted to be confident to manage a case in modular group compared to the didactic group (P < 0.05) indicating a higher level of learning through modular teaching. Conclusions: Modular teaching fares better than didactic method and hence should be used more frequently in community medicine clinical posting.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2024    
    Printed15    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded224    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal