• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文会议>International Technology, Education and Development Conference >(1744) PERCEPTIONS OF MEDICAL STUDENTS TOWARDS USING FORMAL DEBATE AS A STRATEGY TO IMPROVE CURRICULAR AND CROSS-CURRICULAR COMPETENCES
【24h】

(1744) PERCEPTIONS OF MEDICAL STUDENTS TOWARDS USING FORMAL DEBATE AS A STRATEGY TO IMPROVE CURRICULAR AND CROSS-CURRICULAR COMPETENCES

机译：（1744）对医学学生使用正式辩论的看法作为改善课程和跨课程竞争的策略

获取原文
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Methods that encourage students to become involved in higher order thinking tasks such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation are defined as active learning. Thus, active learning fosters complex thinking processes and improves retention, assimilation, understanding, and proper application of course content. Formal debates, a form of active learning, allow students an opportunity not only to identify that there is an issue to resolve, but also to demonstrate a deeper analysis of the issue, including appraisal, critique, and reasoning of the issue for a potential solution. These skills are also essential because healthcare professionals are frequently swamped with new evidence, and the only way to separate the valid from the invalid is to appraise and critique the evidence. With the aim of improving curricular and cross-curricular competences, medical students of the Complutense University of Madrid participated in an innovation activity consisting of a set of formal debate sessions. After the sessions were finished, professors developed and applied an extensive evaluation of the activity. Part of that evaluation was aimed at assessing the perceptions of participating students in relation to the use of formal debate as a didactic tool to improve their generic and specific competences. Students received an invitation to complete an e-questionnaire created with Google Docs once the innovation activity was finished. The completion of the survey was anonymous and non-compulsory. Participants had to score the components and features of the activity, ranging their responses from 0, when they were in total disagreement with the statement, to 3, if they totally agreed with it. During the preparation of debates, professors emphasized the importance of completing the survey in order to evaluate the activity, since it would provide feedback on the aspects that should be discontinued, repeated or improved. Students were asked if carrying out debates on a specific topic was an interesting methodological alternative in university teaching, if their participation in the activity had increased their motivation in the subject and degree, if it had helped them develop competences that other more traditional methodological strategies of teaching do not allow, if the diversity of topics discussed during the debate sessions was appropriate and formative, and if the activity should be repeated in the future. The majority of participating students rated these statements as “highly agree”, i.e., 3, with the exception of the question on their motivation, where responses were equally distributed between “agree” (2) and “highly agree” (3). This probably reflects the fact that most medical students are already motivated when they choose to study Medicine, a trend that normally continues or even increases during the degree. The innovation activity also included a competitive element since the audience, who was composed by their classmates, had to score their performance. For this reason, the questionnaire contained 2 additional items asking if this competitive aspect had increased their motivation and if they agreed that their peers participated in their evaluation. In both questions, participants said that they “highly agreed” with the statement. Finally, they also thought that the feedback provided by professors and moderators had been positive for their learning. These results encourage to continue celebrating the formal debate sessions with future students.
机译：鼓励学生参与的高层次思维的任务，如分析，综合和评价方法被定义为主动学习。因此，主动学习培养综合思维流程，提高保留，消化，吸收，理解和课程内容合理应用。正式辩论，主动学习的形式，让学生有机会不仅能够识别存在问题的决心，也表现出这个问题，包括鉴定，批判的深入分析，并为潜在的解决问题的推理。这些技能也是必不可少的，因为医疗保健专业人士经常与新的证据淹没，并从无效分开有效的唯一办法是评价和批评的证据。为了改善课程和跨学科能力的目的，马德里康普斯顿大学的医学学生参加了由一组正式辩论环节中的创新活动。这些会议结束后，教授开发和应用活动的广泛的评估。该评估的一部分，目的是评估有关参与学生使用正式辩论作为教学工具，以提高他们的一般和特定能力的看法。学生接到邀请来完成与谷歌文档创建一个电子问卷一旦创新活动结束了。调查的完成是匿名的，非强制性的。参加者有得分的组件和活动的特点，从0开始，当他们在声明完全不同意为他们的反应，到3，如果他们完全与它同意。在辩论的准备，教授强调以评估活动，因为它提供即应停药，重复的或改进的方面的反馈完成调查的重要性。学生被要求，如果在一个特定的主题进行辩论是在大学的教学一个有趣的方法选择，如果他们参与活动的主体和程度增加了他们的积极性，如果它已经帮助他们开发能力是其他更传​​统的方法策略教学不允许，如果在辩论会议讨论的议题的多样性是适当的，形成性的，如果该活动应在未来重演。大多数学生参加这些额定陈述“非常同意”，即3，对他们的动机，其中反应是同样之间分配的问题除外“同意”（2）和“非常同意”（3）。这可能反映了一个事实，当他们选择学医，在攻读学位期间，通常持续一个趋势，甚至增加的大多数医学生已经驱使。创新活动也包括在内，因为观众，谁是他们的同学，必须取得进球的表现由竞争因素。出于这个原因，调查问卷包含2个额外的项目，询问是否这个竞争激烈的方面提高了他们的积极性，如果他们认为他们的同行参加了自己的评价。在这两个问题，与会者表示，他们“非常同意”的说法。最后，他们还认为，通过教授和主持人提供的反馈是积极的为他们的学习。这些结果鼓励继续与未来的学生庆祝正式辩论会议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号