Document Type : Original Article
Authors
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Online learning environments are becoming more frequent in teaching and learning
than ever before. Asynchronous learning provides “high degree of interactivity” between participants
and helps them to reflect upon their ideas/thoughts, before sharing them with others leading to more
insightful responses and in‑depth learning. Moderating an online discussion is an art and challenging
task, which needs meticulous planning and effective execution approaches. One of the major
challenges in online discussion is to ensure active participation and interest among participants,
and therefore, it reiterates the need for inclusion of interactive strategies to enable it meaningful
and effective. The present article is to share our experiences in moderating session on “Dramatics
in Medical Education” (DIME) as a part of ML web discussion of Foundation for Advancement in
International Medical Education and Research (FAIMER) at one of the regional FAIMER institutes
in India.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty‑two FAIMER fellows participated in online discussion on DIME,
supplemented with various engagement triggers including, sharing of real‑life situation case scenarios,
motivational quotes, competitions and rewards, script writing, script editing exercises by using Forum
Theatre method, discussion on uploaded academic videos on “YouTube,” use of mnemonics, etc.
RESULTS: Online discussion yielded improved knowledge and positive attitudes of participants
toward DIME. Task‑based exercises within authentic or realistic situations, teamwork, and interactions
facilitated active learning of participants.
CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate planning, well coordination, and interactive strategies can foster
learning and reflective abilities as well as develop favorable perceptions of learners toward virtual
mode of teaching‑learning.
Keywords
environments in students’ performance. Univ J Educ Res 2017;5:517‑27.
2. Gao F, Zhang T, Franklin T. Designing asynchronous online
discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future
directions. Br J Educ Technol 2013;44:469‑83.
3. Shahabadi MM, Uplane M. Synchronous and asynchronous
e‑learning styles and academic performance of e‑learners.
Procedia Soc Behav 2015;176:129‑38.
4. Parrish CW, Guffey SK, Williams DS, Estis JM, Lewis D. Fostering
cognitive presence, social presence and teaching presence with
integrated online‑team‑based learning. TechTrends 2021;3:1‑12.
5. Cook M, Dickerson DL, Annetta LA, Minogue J. In service
teachers’ perceptions of online environments. Q Rev Distance
Educ 2011;12:73‑9.
6. Haidet P, Kubitz K, McCormack WT. Analysis of the team‑based
learning literature: TBL comes of age. J Excell Coll Teach
2014;25:303‑33.
7. Eachampati P, Puppalwar PV, Shigli K, Jagzape A,
Kiran Kumar KS, Supe A, et al. Moderation of online discussion
on communication skills – A GSMC FAIMER experience.
MedEdPublish 2017;3:1‑5 [Doi: 10.15694/mep.2017.000118].
Available from: https://www.mededpublish.org/manuscripts
/1052. [Last accessed on 2021 Aug 21].
8. Ghazivakili Z, Norouzi Nia R, Panahi F, Karimi M, Gholsorkhi H,
Ahmadi Z. The role of critical thinking skills and learning styles
of university students in their academic performance. J Adv Med
Educ Prof 2014;2:95‑102.
9. McCullough M. Bringing drama into medical education. Lancet
2012;379:512‑3.
10. Middlewick Y, Kettle TJ, Wilson JJ. Curtains up! Using forum
theatre to rehearse the art of communication in healthcare
education. Nurse Educ Pract 2012;12:139‑42.
)