The use of blended learning in postgraduate education in orthodontics: student versus teacher perception

被引:3
作者
Maes, Desiree Martine [1 ,2 ]
Zong, Chen [1 ,2 ]
Begnoni, Giacomo [1 ,2 ]
Verdonck, Anna [1 ,2 ]
Willems, Guy [1 ,2 ]
de Llano-Perula, Maria Cadenas [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Dept Oral Hlth Sci Orthodont, Leuven, Belgium
[2] Univ Hosp Leuven, Dent, Kapucijnenvoer 7, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium
关键词
D O I
10.1093/ejo/cjac070
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective To investigate the use of blended learning (BL) in Postgraduate Education in Orthodontics. Methods A self-developed online questionnaire was sent to 244 teaching staff members of the European Orthodontic Departments. They were asked to answer it and share it with their postgraduate students. 18 questions for teaching staff and 27 for postgraduate students evaluated the use, perceptions, feedback options, learning outcomes, and teacher's role in BL. The answers of teaching staff and students were statistically compared by Fisher's Exact Test, Chi-Square Test, Unpaired t-test, and Mann-Whitney Test. Results 124 completed questionnaires were received, 44 from teaching staff and 80 from postgraduate students. Teaching staff is more acquainted with BL than students (P = 0.001). Both groups found BL courses a good alternative to traditional courses (P = 0.654). The use of interactive multimedia was more appreciated by students (P = 0.015). Both groups found students' results not to change with BL, but teaching staff had a more negative perception (P = 0.012). In general, teaching staff perceived feedback and interaction as less essential than postgraduates in BL. Teaching staff felt more like coaches when using BL, while postgraduates did not perceive any changes in teachers' roles (P = 0.006). Limitations: Due to the General Data Protection Regulation it was not possible to directly contact the postgraduate students in Postgraduate Orthodontic Programs throughout Europe. Therefore, this study completely relied on the goodwill of the teaching staff being contacted. Conclusion The main differences in perception between teaching staff and postgraduate students were student results, teachers' role, use, and importance of feedback and interactive multimedia. Although both groups found BL courses to stimulate students' learning and to be a relevant cost-effective addition to traditional courses, they were hesitant to fully replace them with BL.
引用
收藏
页码:258 / 265
页数:8
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Al-Jewair TS, 2009, J DENT EDUC, V73, P730
[2]   Survey of perceived stress-inducing problems among dental students, Saudi Arabia [J].
Al-Saleh, Samar A. ;
Al-Madi, Ebtissam M. ;
Al-Angari, Nadia S. ;
Al-Shehri, Huda A. ;
Shukri, Mohammed Mohammed .
SAUDI DENTAL JOURNAL, 2010, 22 (02) :83-88
[3]   Effectiveness and acceptability of face-to-face, blended and e-learning: a randomised trial of orthodontic undergraduates [J].
不详 .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DENTAL EDUCATION, 2011, 15 (02) :110-117
[4]   Evaluating Usability in Blended Learning Programs Within Health Professions Education: a Scoping Review [J].
Arora, Anish K. ;
Rodriguez, Charo ;
Carver, Tamara ;
Teper, Matthew Hacker ;
Rojas-Rozo, Laura ;
Schuster, Tibor .
MEDICAL SCIENCE EDUCATOR, 2021, 31 (03) :1213-1246
[5]   The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China [J].
Cao, Wenjun ;
Fang, Ziwei ;
Hou, Guoqiang ;
Han, Mei ;
Xu, Xinrong ;
Dong, Jiaxin ;
Zheng, Jianzhong .
PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH, 2020, 287
[6]   Integration of e-learning technologies in an interprofessional health science course [J].
Carbonaro, Mike ;
King, Sharla ;
Taylor, Elizabeth ;
Satzinger, Franziska ;
Snart, Fern ;
Drummond, Jane .
MEDICAL TEACHER, 2008, 30 (01) :25-33
[7]  
Cook DA, 2008, PERSPECT BIOL MED, V51, P5, DOI 10.1353/pbm.2008.0007
[8]  
Cornell R., 1999, Educational Technology, V39, P60
[9]   Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies [J].
Dziuban, Charles ;
Graham, Charles R. ;
Moskal, Patsy D. ;
Norberg, Anders ;
Sicilia, Nicole .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2018, 15
[10]  
European Food Safety Authority, 2019, EFSA J, V17, DOI [10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5926, 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6406]