Background: Higher education attempts to ameliorate the learning experience through match between learning subjects and students’ learning styles. Aim: This study evaluates the efficacy of three different instructional modalities aimed at teaching veterinary students how to make simple suture knots. Methods: A cohort of 43 fourth-year students were split into 3 groups and provided with different instructional modalities: presentation with pictures and descriptions, hard copy text, and muted video. The student’s surgical simulation performance was evaluated. Then, they answered a 23 question-survey, Fleming VARK questionnaire based, investigating their learning profile. Kruskal Wallis test evaluated different instructional modalities effect on student’s performance. The chi-square test assessed differences between instructional modalities and learning profiles, profile self evaluation, and training session comprehension. Results: Students showed auditory unimodal VARK profile (16/43), did not know their learning profile (26/43), and favored personalized teaching strategies (43/43). No differences were found for: surgical performance, except for forceps handling; and between instructional modalities: either for learning profiles (p-value = 0.43), or profile self evaluation (p-value = 0.42). Differences were found between instructional modalities and training session comprehension. As limitations, auditory instructional modalities, participants’ age, and gender were not recorded or evaluated. Conclusion: Our study provides feedback on modern teaching modalities in which students play a key role. Participants showed a variety of learning profiles although displaying no significant performance differences.

Evaluation of veterinary students’ suture performance according to three different instructional modalities

Conte G.;Sgorbini M.;Barsotti G.
2024-01-01

Abstract

Background: Higher education attempts to ameliorate the learning experience through match between learning subjects and students’ learning styles. Aim: This study evaluates the efficacy of three different instructional modalities aimed at teaching veterinary students how to make simple suture knots. Methods: A cohort of 43 fourth-year students were split into 3 groups and provided with different instructional modalities: presentation with pictures and descriptions, hard copy text, and muted video. The student’s surgical simulation performance was evaluated. Then, they answered a 23 question-survey, Fleming VARK questionnaire based, investigating their learning profile. Kruskal Wallis test evaluated different instructional modalities effect on student’s performance. The chi-square test assessed differences between instructional modalities and learning profiles, profile self evaluation, and training session comprehension. Results: Students showed auditory unimodal VARK profile (16/43), did not know their learning profile (26/43), and favored personalized teaching strategies (43/43). No differences were found for: surgical performance, except for forceps handling; and between instructional modalities: either for learning profiles (p-value = 0.43), or profile self evaluation (p-value = 0.42). Differences were found between instructional modalities and training session comprehension. As limitations, auditory instructional modalities, participants’ age, and gender were not recorded or evaluated. Conclusion: Our study provides feedback on modern teaching modalities in which students play a key role. Participants showed a variety of learning profiles although displaying no significant performance differences.
2024
Nocera, I.; Vitale, V.; Conte, G.; Sgorbini, M.; Barsotti, G.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/1276487
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact