PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16199359

Student-led tutorials in problem-based learning: educational outcomes and students' perceptions.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of using students as tutors in a problem-based learning (PBL) medical curriculum. Ninety-one third-year medical students were divided into ten tutorial groups. The groups were randomly allocated into student-led tutorials (SLT) (five groups, n = 44 students) and faculty-led tutorials (FLT) (five groups, n = 47 students). Outcome measurements included assessment of students' performance in tutorials individually and as a group, end-unit examinations scores, assessment of tutoring skills and identifying students' perceptions about peer tutoring. Student tutors were perceived better in providing feedback and in understanding the difficulties students face in tutorials. Tutorial atmosphere, decision-making and support for the group leader were better in SLT compared with FLT groups. Self-assessment of student performance in SLT was not different from FLT. Student scores in the written and practical examinations were comparable in both groups. However, SLT groups found difficulties in analysis of problems presented in the first tutorial session. We conclude that the impact of peer tutoring on student performance in tutorials, group dynamics, and student achievement in examinations is positive overall. However, student tutors require special training before adopting this approach in PBL programs.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Salah Kassab, Marwan F Abu-Hijleh, Qasim Al-Shboul, Hossam Hamdy. 2005. Student-led tutorials in problem-based learning: educational outcomes and students' perceptions.. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590500156186

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Where techno-science meets poverty: medical research and the economy of blood in The Gambia, West Africa.

This paper considers how internationally supported medical research is understood and interpreted by its actual and potential study subjects, exposing the limits to bioethical discourses amidst economic inequalities and contrasting socio-cultural worlds. It focuses on the Medical Research Council (MRC) Laboratories in The Gambia and particularly their Pneumococcal Vaccine Trial (PVT) that was conducted jointly with the Gambian government during 2001-2004. In many respects this was an exemplar of international best practice in trial communication and informed consent procedures. Yet ethnographic and survey research finds that Gambian parents' perspectives on participation are shaped not by trial specificities, but by broader, historically shaped views and experiences of the MRC as an institution. There is a pervasive view that the MRC offers good, free medication to participants, but that it also 'steals blood'. Widespread concerns with blood-stealing emerge from local frames of understanding in which blood is treated as a tradeable good, in which blood accumulation and depletion in bodily processes relates to its exchange in hospital and medical research practices, and in which transactions can be more or less (un)reasonable. Yet such thinking, rooted in an 'economy of blood', has been overlooked by medical research staff and indeed by historians and anthropologists of Africa whose analyses of blood-stealing have been overly transfixed on rumour and the occult. This paper argues that such cultural framings, which guide local critical commentary on trans-national research orders, require serious attention and need to inform open dialogues between scientists and the public if medical research in resource-poor settings is to continue to be sustainable and politically legitimate.

Attitude↗