Preferences Of Students In Preclinic Stage Medical Faculty Of Lampung University To A Various Teaching Methods

  • Atica Ramadhani Putri Universitas Lampung
Keywords: Preclinical students, Preferences Teaching methods

Abstract

Background: Recent literature has compared the use of specific teaching methods with the lecture method. Millennial students tend to prefer team-based learning, and suggest a preference for collaborative and technology-based learning approaches, But according to some literatures, medical students prefer the lecture method which is a passive teaching method. Objective: to find out the description of the pre-clinical stage preference of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Lampung towards various teaching methods. Methods: This research is a descriptive study with a survey method, sampling method is by total sampling. The variable in this study is the preference of preclinical students of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Lampung towards various teaching methods. The data was taken directly using a questionnaire for students in 2016 and 2017. The data will be entered into Microsoft Excel and then converted into tabular form and the mean will be calculated for each variable. Results: From the research, results obtained the highest mean of 4.134 for the CSL method, the second is lectures with a mean of 3.717, after that there is PAL with a mean of 3.481, PBL with a mean of 3.334, practicum with a mean of 3.286, CBL with a mean of 3.218, TBL with a mean of 3.184, and the last plenary with a mean of 2.673. Conclusion Preferences of students to a various teaching methods from the highest mean are CSL, lecture, PAL, PBL, practicum, CBL, TBL, and plenary.

References

1. Ahmed Y, Taha M, Al-Neel. Students’ perception of the learning environment and its relation to their study year and performance in Sudan. International Journal of Medical Education. 2018; 9:145– 50.
2. Khan B. Undergraduates student's perceptions about current lecturing practices. Pak Armed Forces Med J. 2014; 64(2):319–27.
3. Zinski A, Blackwell K, Belue F. Is lecture dead? a preliminary study of medical students’ evaluation of teaching methods in the preclinical curriculum. International Journal of Medical Education. 2017; 8:326– 33.
4. Tsang A, Harris DM. Faculty and second- year medical student perceptions of active learning in an integrated curriculum. Advances in Physiology Education. 2016;

40(4):446–453.
5. Kamei R, Cook S. AAMC readiness for reform duke – national university of Singapore case study. Association Of American Medical Colleges. 2012.
6. Samarasekera DD, Shirley O, Su Ping Y, Shing Chuan H. Medical education in Singapore. Medical Teacher. 2015; 37(8): 707–713.
7. Setiawan IP, Dalen JV, Whittingham J. Instrument for evaluating clinical skill laboratory teacher’s didactical performance. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia. 2013; 2(2):1–13.
8. Hashim R, Qamar K, Khan M. Role of skill laboratory training in medical education - students' perspective. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan. 2016; 26(3):195–8.
9. Muslicha A. Metode pengajaran dalam pendidikan lingkungan hidup pada siswa sekolah dasar (studi pada sekolah adiwiyata di DKI Jakarta). Jurnal Pendidikan. 2016; 16(2):110–26.
10. Hardisman, Yulistini. Pandangan mahasiswa terhadap hambatan pada pelaksanaan skill lab di fakultas kedokteran ( barriers in skill lab training ) pandangan Mahasiswa terhadap hambatan pada pelaksanaan skill lab di fakultas kedokteran universitas andalas. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia. 2016; 2:180–7.
11. Burgess A, Mcgregor D, Mellis C. Medical students as peer tutors?: a systematic review. 2014; 14(1):1–8.
12. Suryadi RA, Rukmini E. Perspektif mahasiswa terhadap visualized peer assisted learning di fakultas kedokteran unika atma jaya. Damianus Journal of Medicine. 2014; 13(2):95–109.
13. Sahu KP, Shivananda N, Vincent R. Medical students' perception of small group teaching effectiveness in hybrid curriculum. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2018; 7.
14. Tyas R. Kesulitan penerapan problem based learning dalam pembelajaran matematika. Tecnoscienza. 2017; 2(1):43–52.
15. Mavenyengwa RT, Nyamayaro T. Developing a curriculum for health professional students on point of care testing for medical diagnosis. International Journal Of Medical Education. 2016; 7:265–
6.

16. Kelly L, Walters L, Rosenthal D. Community-based medical education: is success a result of meaningful personal learning experiences? education for health: change in learning and practice. Education For Health. 2014; 27(1):47–50.
17. Howe A. Patient-centred medicine through student-centred teaching: a student perspective on the key impacts of community-based learning in undergraduate medical education. Medical Education. 2001; 35(7):666–72.
18. Yoo JE, Seoeun H, Gyeongsi L, Seungjae K, Sangmin P, Jongkoo L et al. The development of a community-based medical education program in Korea. Korean Journal of Medical Education. 2018; 30(4):309–15.
19. Rajalingam P, Jerome IR, Nabil Z, Michael AF, Paul G, Naomi LB. Implementation of team-based learning on a large scale: three factors to keep in mind. Medical Teacher. 2018; 40(6):582–588.
20. Haque M, Campus CH. Team based learning in medical education. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Review and Research. 2017; 43(2):58–63.
21. Rukmini E. Evaluation Of pilot PBL implementation at the faculty of medicine atma jaya catholic university. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Dan Profesi Kesehatan Indonesia. 2006; 1(3):69-76.
22. Asni E, Hamidy MY. Manfaat dan hambatan Problem-Based Learning (PBL) menurut perspektif mahasiswa baru di Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Riau. Jurnal Ilmu Kedokteran. 2017; 4(2):95.
23. Yudaristy H, Irfanuddin I, Azhar MB. Persepsi mahasiswa dan dosen tentang ketercapaian kompetensi dasar dan klinis pendidikan dokter di Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Sriwijaya. Jurnal Kedokteran dan Kesehatan. 2014; 1(1):25–33.
Published
2022-12-30