Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Department of Medical Education, Medical Education Development Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Department of Operating Room, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are various instructional methods worldwide and virtual instruction is one
of them. This widely used method involves online instruction and e‑learning. The present study
compares the effects of lecture‑based and virtual instruction on student learning, satisfaction, and
content retention among surgical technology students at Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The population of this two‑stage, quasi‑experimental study consisted
of 40 surgical technology students at the School of Nursing and Midwifery. After fulfilling inclusion
criteria, they were randomly assigned to the virtual instruction group (VG, n = 20) and the traditional,
lecture‑based instruction group (TG, n = 20). Data were collected via a researcher‑made student
satisfaction questionnaire and two learning examinations. Their validity and reliability had been
confirmed. The data were analyzed using SPSS 13 and analytical and descriptive tests (P < 0.05).
RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the TG and the VG with respect
to the mean score in the first examination (P = 0.89). However, the two groups were significantly
different in terms of the mean score in the second examination (P = 0.03). Regarding content retention
and recall performance, the VG outperformed the TG. Furthermore, the mean satisfaction score of
the VG (132.24 ± 17.92) was higher than that of the TG (115.56 ± 17.57) (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Virtual instruction and lecture‑based instruction had comparable short‑term learning
outcomes. Nevertheless, with the passage of time, it was revealed that virtual instruction could result
in better learning performance and higher content retention and satisfaction.
Keywords
appendectomy surgical stimulation software (Game‑Based) on
the satisfaction of undergraduate students of operating room
in Isfahan, 2017. Brain Board Res Artficial Intelligence Neurosc
2019;10:104‑11.
2. Khazaei MR, Aryamanesh M. Comparison of the effect of
education on water and electrolyte and acid‑base disorders
through group discussion (problem solving) and lecture on
clinical reasoning in pediatric interns. Med Sci 2017;7:1‑19.
3. Sheikh AbuMasoudi R, Soltani Molla Yaghobi N. Comparison
the effect of electronic learning and teaching based on lecture on
knowledge of nursing students about heart dysrhythmias in 2014:
A short report. J Rafsanjan Univer Med Sci 2015;14:339‑44.
4. van den Hurk MM, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Muijtjens AM,
van der Vleuten CP. Impact of individual study on tutorial group
discussion. Teach Learn Med 1999;11:196‑201.
5. Žuvić‑Butorac M, Rončević N, Nemčanin D, Nebić Z. Blended
e‑learning in higher education: Research on students’ perspective.
Issues Inf Sci Inf Technol 2011;8:409.
6. Fathi VK, Pardakhtchi MH, Rabiei M. Effectiveness Evaluation
of Virtual Learning Courses in High Education System of
IRAN (Case of Ferdowsi University); 2011. p. 5‑21.
7. Saeedinejat S, Vafaeenajar A. The effect of e‑learning on students’
educational success. Iran J Med Educ 2011;11:1‑9.
8. TaheriM, AbbasiM, MohammadiM, MohammadbeigiA, JokarA,
Mokhtari M, et al. The effectiveness of lectures and e‑learning
education on cognitive taxonomy based on theory Bloom.
J Sabzevar Univer Med Sci 2018;24:95‑102.
9. Nourian A, Nourian A, Ebnahmadi A, Akbarzadeh Bagheban A,
Khoshnevisan MH. Comparison of e‑learning and traditional
classroom instruction of dental public health for dental students of
Shahid Beheshti dental school during 2010‑2011. Shahid Beheshti
Univer Dent J 2012;30:174‑83.
10. Rosenfeld G. A Comparison of the Outcomes of Distance
Learning Students Versus Traditional Classroom Students in the
Community College. Florida Atlantic University; 2005.
11. Sadeghi T, Heidari S, Bakhshi H. Comparing the lecture and
e‑learning training methods on knowledge of nurses participating
in continuing medical education (CME) programs in Rafsanjan
university of medical sciences. Biannual Med Educ Babol Univ
Med Sci 2014;2:59‑64. Biannual Medical Education, Babol Univ
Med Sci 2014;2:59‑64.
12. Mohammadi BM. Comparison of Computer‑Based and
Lecture‑Based Learning Techniques on Knowledge Retention
in Nursing Students in Bushehr University of Medical Sciences.
FME; 2011.
13. Golchai B, Nazari N, Hassani F, Bahadori MH. Computer‑based
E‑teaching (virtual medical teaching) or traditional teaching:
A comparison between medical and dentistry students. Procedia
Soc Behav Sci 2012;47:2080‑3.
14. Tadrisi SD, Siavash Vahabi Y, Ghayem SH, Ebadi A,
Daneshmandi M, Saghafinia M. Comparing the effect of triage
education in lecture and multimedia software on nurses learning.
Iran J Crit Care Nurs 2011;4:7‑12.
15. Hugenholtz NI, De Croon EM, Smits PB, Van Dijk FJ,
Nieuwenhuijsen K. Effectiveness of e‑learning in continuing
medical education for occupational physicians. Occup Med(Lond)
2008;58:370‑2.
16. Demetriadis S, Pombortsis A. E‑lectures for flexible learning:
A study on their learning efficiency. J Educ Technol Soc
2007;10:147‑57.
17. Ludlow JB, Platin E. A comparison of Web page and slide/tape
for instruction in periapical and panoramic radiographic anatomy.
J Dent Educ 2000;64:269‑75.
18. MottaghiP, NajimiA. Teaching medical students: Computer‑based
teaching versus traditional lecture. Iran J Med Educ 2018;18:1‑7.
19. Zolfaghari M, Mehrdad N, Parsa Yekta Z, Salmani Barugh N,
Bahrani N. The effect of lecture and e‑learning methods on
learning mother and child health course in nursing students. Iran
J Med Educ 2007;7:31‑9.
20. Chao SH, Brett B, Wiecha JM, Norton LE, Levine SA. Use of
an online curriculum to teach delirium to fourth‑year medical
students: A comparison with lecture format. J Am Geriatr Soc
2012;60:1328‑32.
)