Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMC Med Educ ; 19(1): 36, 2019 Jan 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30683084

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The number of resources available to medical students studying a degree in medicine is growing exponentially. In addition to traditional learning resources such as lectures and textbooks, students are increasingly using e-learning tools like commercially available question banks to supplement their learning. Student preference for learning resources has not been described in detail, and a better understanding of the tools perceived to be useful could provide essential information to medical educators when designing and implementing medical curricula. METHODS: We invited 1083 undergraduate and postgraduate medical students from two major Australian universities to complete an online survey. Questions asked students to indicate the frequency with which they use various types of resources when learning new material or when revising previous content. RESULTS: Approximately one third (32.3%, N = 350) of invited participants completed the survey, and of those who responded, the gender distribution was even with a median age of 25 years. Making written notes and reading textbooks were the most frequently utilized resources for learning new material. Online or downloaded question banks were the most frequently used resource for revision. In addition to the use of traditional learning tools, the majority of students report using a variety of e-learning tools including online teaching videos (92%, n = 322) and question banks (90.6%, n = 317). CONCLUSION: Despite the trend towards e-learning, traditional resources like attendance at face-to-face lectures remain the most popular for learning new material. The increasing use of question banks raises potential issues of poor alignment to medical school curricula. With the advantages of exam technique practice, time efficiency and multiplatform availability, their popularity is likely to continue. Evaluation of existing question banks is required to facilitate appropriate integration into the curricula, with equitable access for all students.


Asunto(s)
Educación a Distancia , Educación de Postgrado en Medicina/métodos , Educación de Pregrado en Medicina/métodos , Estudiantes de Medicina , Libros de Texto como Asunto , Adulto , Australia , Femenino , Humanos , Internet , Masculino , Facultades de Medicina , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
2.
Clin Teach ; 11(6): 467-71, 2014 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25212937

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Bedside teaching is a vital component of clinical training in the medical curriculum. There is growing dissatisfaction among students regarding its delivery, and the main obstacles identified are: the availability of clinical tutors and access to suitable patients. AIM: We sought to evaluate Sydney University medical students' perceptions and satisfaction with two structured bedside teaching methods. METHODS: We compared two strategies of bedside teaching. In the old, traditional method an experienced clinician was formally allocated to a group, and was 'responsible' for regular (usually weekly) bedside teaching for that group. In the new method a specified, protected clinical teaching time was chosen, during which time any tutor available (mainly Junior Medical Officers, JMOs) performed clinical bedside teaching for that student group. The strengths and weaknesses of the two methods were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 104 students out of a possible 128 (81% participation rate) took part in this study. In the new method, 100 per cent of students had their scheduled bedside tutorial delivered every week, compared with 20 per cent in the old system, 70 per cent of tutors had patients prepared every week, compared with 25 per cent in the old system, and 64 per cent of students had 'no frustration' with clinical bedside tutorials, compared with 27 per cent in the old system. CONCLUSIONS: The new method, using protected clinical teaching time at a specific scheduled weekly time, and using opportunistically available junior clinicians, is perceived by students as superior to the old method of one constant, experienced tutor allocated to a group. The main obstacles [to bedside teaching] are: the availability of clinical tutors and access to suitable patients.


Asunto(s)
Educación de Pregrado en Medicina/métodos , Internado y Residencia/organización & administración , Rondas de Enseñanza/organización & administración , Enseñanza/métodos , Curriculum , Humanos , Aprendizaje Basado en Problemas/métodos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...