Approaches to learning and academic performance in pharmacology among second-year undergraduate medical students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-6108.2018.4.32395Keywords:
learning, pharmacology, academic performance, male, female.Abstract
AIMS: To determine the learning approach of second-year undergraduate medical students and whether a surface or deep approach to learning had any correlation with the pharmacology sessional and university examination marks obtained.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among second-year medical students in their fifth semester. To determine the students’ learning approach, whether superficial or deep, we used the Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F), which contains 20 items in the form of a five-point Likert scale and is suitable for use in higher education settings. Cronbach’s alpha was calculated using the scores obtained from a sample of 20 students to determine the internal consistency. To determine the relationship between the learning approach and examination scores, the average of the individual sessional examination marks and the university examination scores obtained by the students were calculated.
RESULTS: Of the 170 students who participated in the study, 87 (51.2%) were females. The Cronbach’s alpha value was considered acceptable for both surface and deep approach. While the academic performance was significantly better in females (U = 2571.5; p = 0.001), no difference was seen in the learning approach based on gender. Fifty (29.4%) students had a higher score for the surface approach. This group had lower examination scores compared with those with equal scores for surface and deep approach or higher scores for the deep approach. A weak negative correlation was seen between the examination marks and surface approach (τb = −0.167; p = 0.002). When analyzed based on gender, the correlation was statistically significant only in females (τb = −0.173; p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: A weak negative correlation was seen between the examination marks and surface approach to learning. Although statistically significant, the actual difference between the groups was of a small magnitude. Hence, whether promoting deep learning approach improves academic performance in terms of marks obtained in the examination needs to be confirmed by further studies.Downloads
References
Medical Council of India. Medical Council of India Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997 (amended up to January 2016) [Internet]. New Delhi; 2016 (cited 2017 March 11). Available from: http://www.mciindia.org/Rules-and-Regulation/GME_REGULATIONS.pdf
Biggs J, Kember D, Leung DY. The revised two-factor Study Process Questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. Br J Educ Psychol. 2001;71(Pt 1):133-49. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158433
Keefe JW. Student learning styles: diagnosing and prescribing programs. Reston: NASSP; 1979.
Biggs J. What do inventories of students' learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. Br J Edu Psychol. 1993;63:3-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01038.x
Newble D, Hejka EJ, Whelan A. The approaches to learning of specialist physicians. Med Educ. 1990;24:1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.1990.tb02507.x
Leiden Li, Crosby RD, Folmer H. Assessing learning styles inventories and how well they predict academic performances. Acad Med. 1990;65:395-401. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199006000-00009
Martinelli V, Raykov M. Evaluation of the Revised Two-Factor Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ-2F) for Student Teacher Approaches to Learning. Journal of Educational and Social Research. 2017;7(2):9-13. https://doi.org/10.5901/jesr.2017.v7n2p9
Nunnally J, Bernstein L. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill Higher, INC; 1994.
Shah DK, Yadav RL, Sharma D, Yadav PK, Sapkota NK, Jha RK, Islam MN. Learning approach among health sciences students in a medical college in Nepal: a cross-sectional study. Adv Med Edu Pract. 2016;7:137. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S100968
Shaik SA, Almarzuqi A, Almogheer R, Alharbi O, Jalal A, Alorainy M. Assessing Saudi medical students learning approach using the revised two-factor study process questionnaire. Int J Med Educ. 2017;8:292. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.5974.7a06
Paudel KR, Nepal HP, Shrestha B, Panta R, Toth S. Distribution and academic significance of learning approaches among pre-clinical medical students at Trinity School of Medicine, St Vincent and the Grenadines. J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2018;15. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.9
Chen Y, Henning M, Yielder J, Jones R, Wearn A, Weller J. Progress testing in the medical curriculum: students' approaches to learning and perceived stress. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:147. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-015-0426-y
Lyndon MP, Henning MA, Alyami H, Krishna S, Yu TC, Hill AG. The impact of a revised curriculum on academic motivation, burnout, and quality of life among medical students. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2017;4:2382120517721901. https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120517721901
Gadzella BM, Masten WG, Stacks J. Students' stress and their learning strategies, test anxiety, and attributions. Coll Stud J. 1998;32(3):416-22.
Van der Vleuten CPM, Verwijnen GM, Wijnen WHFW. Fifteen years of experience with progress testing in a problem-based learning curriculum. Med Teach. 1996;18(2):103-10. https://doi.org/10.3109/01421599609034142
Hilliard RI. How do medical students learn: medical student learning styles and factors that affect these learning styles. Teach Learn Med. 1995;7(4):201-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401339509539745
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 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.
