Learning radiology from interactive videodiscs: bar-code book versus computer-assisted instruction.

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We compared an interactive videodisc with bar-code book with an interactive videodisc with computer-assisted instruction for learning radiology to determine whether there would be differences in instructional effectiveness, instruction time, or subjective preference. METHODS: Two different videodisc modules were created. Each was presented in two formats with identical content: bar-code book and computer-assisted instruction. In a controlled crossover experimental design, 48 fourth-year medical students were assigned one bar-code book module and one computer module. Pre- and posttests were administered. RESULTS: Mean scores improved from pretest to posttest after students used the modules in either format (p < .01). There were no significant differences between students who used the bar-code book and those who used the computer in pretest scores, posttest scores, gains in score from pretest to posttest, or instruction time for either module. Subjectively, 74% of the students preferred computer-assisted instruction, 20% preferred bar-code book, and 7% preferred neither. CONCLUSION: Although bar-code book and computer versions of an interactive videodisc can be educationally equivalent, most students preferred the computer. When videodisc is being integrated into the curriculum, the choice between bar-code book and computer-assisted instruction can be made on the basis of noneducational factors such as cost and availability.