Crossword puzzles versus Student-Led Objective Tutorials (SLOT) as innovative pedagogies in undergraduate medical education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2021.1.37105Keywords:
Student Led Objective Tutorial, Cross word puzzle, Pedagogical tools, Small group teaching methodsAbstract
AIMS: Small group teaching in Pharmacology offers an effective platform to encourage interaction amongst peers and self-directed learning. The present study is an attempt to assess and compare the effectiveness and perception of students on two different pedagogical methods: Crossword puzzles and Student Led Objective Tutorials (SLOT).
METHODS: Second year undergraduate students who gave their informed consent were divided randomly into two groups: one which received crossword puzzle as a teaching learning method and the other had SLOT during which the students conducted an interactive quiz with multiple choice questions prepared by themselves. The students’ perceptions were recorded using a self-administered questionnaire. One week later, a unit test was conducted for both the groups and the performance of the students was compared. Statistical analysis was done using independent Student’s T test with SPSS version 15.0.
RESULTS: Analyses revealed a statistical significant difference (P<0.001) between the mean marks obtained in the SLOT group (n= 74; 6.5±3.8) and the marks obtained in the crossword group (n= 87; 4.2±2.9), with the students in the tutorial group performing better. The students opined that SLOT sessions helped them to understand Pharmacology better whereas crossword sessions enabled them to memorize the names of the drugs.
CONCLUSION: The present study revealed that SLOT sessions fared better compared to the crossword puzzles in terms of improving the students’ test scores. It fostered teamwork, self-directed learning skills and critical thinking. Crossword puzzles make the session more student friendly as it is fun and engaging but a careful design is inevitable as it may fail to test in-depth learning in students.
Downloads
References
Arora K, Hashilkar NK. Effectiveness of student-led objective tutorials in pharmacology teaching to medical students. Indian J Pharmacol. 2016;48(1):S78-S82. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.193321
Hashilkar NK, Gelula MH, Angadi NB. Effectiveness and student perspective of a pilot effort in team based learning in pharmacology for medical undergraduate. International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology.2016;5(4):1413-16. https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20162444
Kumar RP, Kandhasamy K, Chauhan RC, Bazroy J, Purty AJ, Singh Z. Tutorials: an effective and interactive method of teaching undergraduate medical students. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2016;3(9):2593-5. https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20163079
Sivagnanam G, Saraswathi S, Rajasekaran A. Student-Led Objective Tutorial (SLOT) in Medical Education. Med Educ Online. 2006;11(1):4610. https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v11i.4610
Singh K, Katyal R, Singh A, Joshi HS, Chandra S. Assessment of effectiveness of small group teaching among medical students. J Contemporary Med Edu. 2016;4(4):145-8. https://doi.org/10.5455/jcme.20161016115304
Medical Council of India. Salient features of regulation on graduate medical education in Part III, Section 4 of the Gazette of India dated 17th May1997 [Internet]. c2020 [Amended Up to 2028 May; cited 2020]. Available at: https://www.nmc.org.in/rules-regulations/graduate-medical-education-regulations-1997.
Bartley PD. Crossword puzzles. J Emerg Nurs 1997;23:64-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-1767(97)90067-2
Kumar LR, B angera S, Thalenjeri P. Introducing innovative crossword puzzles in undergraduate physiology teaching-learning process. Arch Med Health Scis 2015;3(1):127-130. https://doi.org/10.4103/2321-4848.154964
Saxena A, Nesbitt R, Pahwa P, Mills S. Crossword puzzles: active learning in undergraduate pathology and medical education. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009; 133(9): 1457–62.
Dee Fink L. Creating Significant Learning Experience: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco, California: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2003.
Towle A, Cottrell D. Self directed learning. Arch Dis Child. 1996;74:357–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.74.4.357
Sobral DT. Cross-year peer tutoring experience in a medical school: Conditions and outcomes for student tutors. Med Educ. 2002;36:1064-70. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01308.x
Sukhlecha A, Jadav SP, Gosai TR, Baluswamy D. Student-led objective tutorials in Pharmacology: An interventional study. Indian J Pharmacol 2016;48(1):S83-S88. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7613.193310
De Grave WS, Dolmans DH, Van Der Vleuten CP. Student perspectives on critical incidents in the tutorial group. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2002;7:201. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021104201303
Tipping J, Freeman RF, Rachlis AR. Using faculty and student perceptions of group dynamics to develop recommendations for PBL training. Acad Med. 1995;70:1050. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199511000-00028
Saxena A, Nesbitt R, Pahwa P, Mills S. Crossword puzzles: active learning in undergraduate pathology and medical education. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(9):1457-62.
Crossman EK, Crossman SM. The crossword puzzle as a teaching tool. Teaching Psychol. 1983;10(2):98-9. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top1002_10
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Medica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
The submission of originals to Scientia Medica implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite Scientia Medica as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.
