Introducing Group Open-Book Exams as a Learning and Assessment Strategy in the Clinical Biochemistry Course for Medical Students.

clinical biochemistry open-book exam students' achievement students' perception team-based learning

Journal

Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jan 2024
Historique:
accepted: 07 01 2024
medline: 7 2 2024
pubmed: 7 2 2024
entrez: 7 2 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Teachers constantly strive to obtain reliable and appropriate teaching and assessment methods to maximize the learning experience. This study aimed to introduce combined modified team-based learning and open-book exams (TBL/OBEs) as learning and assessment strategies in clinical biochemistry for medical students and assess students' perceptions. Second-year medical students enrolled in the clinical biochemistry course were included in this study and subjected to TBL/OBE assessment. The assessment included two parts: the open-book format for half of the questions and the closed-book format for the other as a control. Upon completing the combined TBL/OBE session, the students were required to complete a structured survey to evaluate their perception of the experience. The data were gathered and analyzed. Data were presented as mean±standard error of the mean (SEM), and a p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 358 students completed the TBL/OBE and closed-book exam (CBE) and responded to the survey. Of these students, 76% preferred the OBE, and 84% thought it was a suitable learning method. On the one hand, the mean difficulty of the OBE format was 92.7±1.5 SEM, while, for the CBE, the mean difficulty was 88.7±1.9 SEM (p=0.015). On the other hand, the mean discrimination factor for OBE was 0.26±0.04 and, for the CBE, 0.41±0.04 SEM (p=0.0016). Males found the OBE questions easier (p=0.025) and less stressful (p=0.01). A combined model of modified TBL and OBE is a successful learning and assessment strategy in clinical biochemistry for medical students.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Teachers constantly strive to obtain reliable and appropriate teaching and assessment methods to maximize the learning experience. This study aimed to introduce combined modified team-based learning and open-book exams (TBL/OBEs) as learning and assessment strategies in clinical biochemistry for medical students and assess students' perceptions.
METHODS METHODS
Second-year medical students enrolled in the clinical biochemistry course were included in this study and subjected to TBL/OBE assessment. The assessment included two parts: the open-book format for half of the questions and the closed-book format for the other as a control. Upon completing the combined TBL/OBE session, the students were required to complete a structured survey to evaluate their perception of the experience. The data were gathered and analyzed. Data were presented as mean±standard error of the mean (SEM), and a p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS RESULTS
A total of 358 students completed the TBL/OBE and closed-book exam (CBE) and responded to the survey. Of these students, 76% preferred the OBE, and 84% thought it was a suitable learning method. On the one hand, the mean difficulty of the OBE format was 92.7±1.5 SEM, while, for the CBE, the mean difficulty was 88.7±1.9 SEM (p=0.015). On the other hand, the mean discrimination factor for OBE was 0.26±0.04 and, for the CBE, 0.41±0.04 SEM (p=0.0016). Males found the OBE questions easier (p=0.025) and less stressful (p=0.01).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
A combined model of modified TBL and OBE is a successful learning and assessment strategy in clinical biochemistry for medical students.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38322080
doi: 10.7759/cureus.51792
pmc: PMC10844773
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e51792

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024, Eldakhakhny et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Auteurs

Basmah Eldakhakhny (B)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.
Food, Nutrition, and Lifestyle Research Unit, King Fahd for Medical Research Centre, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.

Aliaa A Alamoudi (AA)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.

Hoda Gad (H)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.
Department of Medical Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Alexandria University, Alexandria, EGY.

Yousef Almoghrabi (Y)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.

Taghreed Shamrani (T)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.
Food, Nutrition, and Lifestyle Research Unit, King Fahd for Medical Research Centre, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.

Hussam Daghistani (H)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.

Abdulhadi Bima (A)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.

Ghada Ajabnoor (G)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.
Food, Nutrition, and Lifestyle Research Unit, King Fahd for Medical Research Centre, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAU.

Fayza Alfayez (F)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.

Ayman Elsamanoudy (A)

Department of Clinical Biochemistry, King Abdulaziz University Faculty of Medicine, Jeddah, SAU.
Department of Medical Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Mansoura University Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura, EGY.

Classifications MeSH