4.3 Article

Development and evaluation of an interactive electronic laboratory manual for cooperative learning of medical histology

Journal

ANATOMICAL SCIENCES EDUCATION
Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages 342-350

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/ase.1350

Keywords

histology education; medical education; microscopic anatomy; virtual microscopy; laboratory instruction; medical histology; cooperative; collaborative learning; e-learning; computer-assisted learning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article describes the development of an interactive computer-based laboratory manual, created to facilitate the teaching and learning of medical histology. The overarching goal of developing the manual is to facilitate self-directed group interactivities that actively engage students during laboratory sessions. The design of the manual includes guided instruction for students to navigate virtual slides, exercises for students to monitor learning, and cases to provide clinical relevance. At the end of the laboratory activities, student groups can generate a laboratory report that may be used to provide formative feedback. The instructional value of the manual was evaluated by a questionnaire containing both closed-ended and open-ended items. Closed-ended items using a five-point Likert-scale assessed the format and navigation, instructional contents, group process, and learning process. Open-ended items assessed student's perception on the effectiveness of the manual in facilitating their learning. After implementation for two consecutive years, student evaluation of the manual was highly positive and indicated that it facilitated their learning by reinforcing and clarifying classroom sessions, improved their understanding, facilitated active and cooperative learning, and supported self-monitoring of their learning. Anat Sci Educ 6: 342-350. (c) 2013 American Association of Anatomists.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available