Development and Evaluation of a Hybrid Course in Clinical Virology at a Faculty of Pharmacy in Lille, France.
e-learning
education, distance
pharmacy
virology
Journal
JMIR medical education
ISSN: 2369-3762
Titre abrégé: JMIR Med Educ
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101684518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Apr 2019
11 Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
12
04
2018
accepted:
03
11
2018
revised:
15
10
2018
entrez:
12
4
2019
pubmed:
12
4
2019
medline:
12
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
During their studies, pharmacy students must acquire the specific skills in clinical virology required for their subsequent professional practice. Recent experiments on teaching and learning in higher education have shown that hybrid courses strengthen the students' commitment to learning and enable high-quality knowledge acquisition. This study concerned the design and deployment of a hybrid course that combines face-to-face and Web-based instruction in clinical virology for fourth-year pharmacy students. The study's objectives were to (1) measure the students' level of involvement in the course, (2) gauge their interest in this type of learning, and (3) highlight any associated difficulties. The study included 194 fourth-year pharmacy students from the Lille Faculty of Pharmacy (University of Lille, Lille, France) between January and June 2017. The students followed a hybrid course comprising an online learning module and 5 tutorial sessions in which professional situations were simulated. The learning module and 3 online evaluation sessions were delivered via the Moodle learning management system. Each tutorial session ended with an evaluation. The number of Moodle log-ins, the number of views of learning resources, and the evaluation marks were recorded. The coefficient for the correlation between the marks in the online evaluation and those in the tutorials was calculated. The students' opinions and level of satisfaction were evaluated via a course questionnaire. The course's learning resources and Web pages were viewed 21,446 and 3413 times, respectively. Of the 194 students, 188 (96.9%) passed the course (ie, marks of at least 10 out of 20). There was a satisfactory correlation between the marks obtained in the online evaluations and those obtained after the tutorials. The course met the students' expectations in 53.2% of cases, and 57.4% of the students stated that they were able to work at their own pace. Finally, 26.6% of the students stated that they had difficulty organizing their work around this hybrid course. Our results showed that pharmacy students were strongly in favor of a hybrid course. The levels of attendance and participation were high. However, teachers must be aware that some students will encounter organizational difficulties.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
During their studies, pharmacy students must acquire the specific skills in clinical virology required for their subsequent professional practice. Recent experiments on teaching and learning in higher education have shown that hybrid courses strengthen the students' commitment to learning and enable high-quality knowledge acquisition.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study concerned the design and deployment of a hybrid course that combines face-to-face and Web-based instruction in clinical virology for fourth-year pharmacy students. The study's objectives were to (1) measure the students' level of involvement in the course, (2) gauge their interest in this type of learning, and (3) highlight any associated difficulties.
METHODS
METHODS
The study included 194 fourth-year pharmacy students from the Lille Faculty of Pharmacy (University of Lille, Lille, France) between January and June 2017. The students followed a hybrid course comprising an online learning module and 5 tutorial sessions in which professional situations were simulated. The learning module and 3 online evaluation sessions were delivered via the Moodle learning management system. Each tutorial session ended with an evaluation. The number of Moodle log-ins, the number of views of learning resources, and the evaluation marks were recorded. The coefficient for the correlation between the marks in the online evaluation and those in the tutorials was calculated. The students' opinions and level of satisfaction were evaluated via a course questionnaire.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The course's learning resources and Web pages were viewed 21,446 and 3413 times, respectively. Of the 194 students, 188 (96.9%) passed the course (ie, marks of at least 10 out of 20). There was a satisfactory correlation between the marks obtained in the online evaluations and those obtained after the tutorials. The course met the students' expectations in 53.2% of cases, and 57.4% of the students stated that they were able to work at their own pace. Finally, 26.6% of the students stated that they had difficulty organizing their work around this hybrid course.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that pharmacy students were strongly in favor of a hybrid course. The levels of attendance and participation were high. However, teachers must be aware that some students will encounter organizational difficulties.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30973341
pii: v5i1e10766
doi: 10.2196/10766
pmc: PMC6482402
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e10766Informations de copyright
©Anne Goffard, Pascal Odou, El Moukhtar Aliouat, Cécile-Marie Aliouat-Denis, Christophe Carnoy, Bertrand Décaudin, Cuny Damien, Mounira Hamoudi, Claire Pinçon, Katia Quelennec, Sebastien Zanetti, Pierre Ravaux, Annie Standaert. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (http://mededu.jmir.org), 11.04.2019.
Références
Br J Educ Psychol. 2000 Jun;70 ( Pt 2):243-54
pubmed: 10900781
Educ Health (Abingdon). 2006 Mar;19(1):14-21
pubmed: 16531298
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Dec;14(5):725-38
pubmed: 19184497
Am J Pharm Educ. 2008 Dec 15;72(6):132
pubmed: 19325952
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Jun;78(3):334-41
pubmed: 19729259
Am J Pharm Educ. 2010 Jun 15;74(5):null
pubmed: 20798797
J Adv Nurs. 2010 Dec;66(12):2785-95
pubmed: 20946565
Nurse Educ Today. 2012 May;32(4):464-8
pubmed: 21645947
Anat Sci Educ. 2014 May-Jun;7(3):234-41
pubmed: 23959807
Front Psychol. 2014 Apr 17;5:324
pubmed: 24860517
Korean J Med Educ. 2014 Mar;26(1):19-24
pubmed: 25805076
Scott Med J. 2015 Nov;60(4):202-7
pubmed: 26403568
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Sep 28;15:157
pubmed: 26415874
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jan 04;18(1):e2
pubmed: 26729058
Anat Sci Educ. 2016 Oct;9(5):422-30
pubmed: 26929149
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Jun 03;16:158
pubmed: 27256081
J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2016 Nov-Dec;21(6):476-485
pubmed: 28018149
Ann Biol Clin (Paris). 2017 Apr 1;75(2):181-192
pubmed: 28377331
FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2017 May 1;364(10):
pubmed: 28498952
Sports Biomech. 2017 Sep;16(3):297-312
pubmed: 28534436
Breastfeed Med. 2017 Dec;12(10):629-636
pubmed: 28926281
Med Teach. 2018 Aug;40(8):855-861
pubmed: 29117744
JMIR Med Educ. 2018 Mar 05;4(1):e6
pubmed: 29506968
Perspect Med Educ. 2018 Oct;7(5):311-317
pubmed: 30187391