Classroom teaching versus online teaching in physiology practical course – does this lead to different examination results?
Background: Due to contact restrictions during the Corona pandemic, teaching at the Center for Physiology and Pathophysiology at the University of Cologne was temporarily offered online for some students and face-to-face for others. As there are different views on the effectiveness of online teachin...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | GMS Journal for Medical Education |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://journals.publisso.de/en/journals/jme/volume42/zma001732 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background: Due to contact restrictions during the Corona pandemic, teaching at the Center for Physiology and Pathophysiology at the University of Cologne was temporarily offered online for some students and face-to-face for others. As there are different views on the effectiveness of online teaching, this study compared students’ examination results between the teaching formats (face-to-face vs. online).
Methods: In winter 2021/22, a total of 198 students in their fourth preclinical semester took part in the physiology course. The students were randomly assigned to 15 practical courses, so that the practical course was completed either traditionally in presence (face-to-face; FtFgroup) or as an online practical course via Zoom® (Ogroup). The teaching format versus the score achieved per test question were recorded for each examinee. The differences in test scores were calculated using a two-sided t-test. The effect size was determined using Cohen’s d. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was used as a measure of the correlation.
Results: In comparison with the Ogroup (M=7.02), the FtFgroup (M=7.38) achieved a significantly higher test score on average. The effect size was low (Cohen’s d=0.135). The FtFgroup performed better than the Ogroup in 14 subject areas. The Spearman’s correlation test between the number of FtF participations and the test scores achieved reached a value of r=0.236 (p<.001).
Conclusion: Our study shows that students who have attended traditional face-to-face classes tend to perform better in the written exam. The reasons may be multifactorial. However, online teaching also offers some advantages, such as flexibility in terms of location and time management for students. The choice between online and face-to-face teaching should be based on the specific requirements of the course. Ideally, a hybrid solution that combines the advantages of both formats would be an effective teaching format. It is therefore essential to continuously review educational practices. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2366-5017 |