A comparison of interactive videodisc instruction with live animal laboratories.

Abstract

This study compared interactive videodisc-simulated laboratories with two types of traditional labs: a traditional general cardiovascular physiology participation lab and a traditional fibrillation/positive pressure ventilation demonstration lab. The two laboratory sections (a total of 85 first-year veterinary medical students) were divided into 12 lab groups of 3-4 students per lab section. These groups were randomly assigned to either a traditional live animal laboratory or an interactive videodisc-simulated laboratory to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of these methods in teaching physiology. A 22-item, multiple-choice/short answer test was given to all students after the laboratories. In both the participation and the demonstration laboratories, there were no significant differences between group test scores of the interactive videodisc groups and the live animal laboratory groups, but there were differences in time spent by both students and instructors. It was concluded that the interactive videodisc-simulated lab was as effective as the traditional live-animal labs and was more time efficient than the traditional participation lab.

Comparison of the cost-effectiveness of a computer-assisted learning program with a tutored demonstration to teach intestinal motility to medical students

“…In this study student learning, as measured by answers to key questions, is comparable for both groups, while the cost of the live laboratory is significantly higher. The findings of this study are similar to those of similar studies where computer-based learning methods have been compared to traditional live laboratories in undergraduate physiology and anatomy Coleman et al, 1994;Guy & Frisby, 1992;Fawver et al, 1990).…”

Are Multimedia Resources Effective in Life Science Education? A Meta-Analysis

“…Four papers had no comparison or control group and did not measure a learning gain (Adamczyk, 2009;Blake, 2003;Dantas, 2008;McAteer, 1996); three evaluated an inappropriate student population (Dunsworth, 2007;McLean, 2005;Corton, 2006); eight had incomplete and/or irretrievable data (Fawver, 1990;Garg, 2002;Stith, 2004;McFarlin, 2008;Kohlmeier, 2003;Goldberg, 2000;Petersson, 2009 andGuy, 1992). Three other papers were also excluded on the basis of being a single-cohort study with no comparison to either a control group or as part of a before-and-after design (Dewhurst, 2000;McNulty, 2000;McNulty, 2004).…”

The effectiveness of humane teaching methods in veterinary education

“…• University of Colorado School of Medicine: 1992-1995(McCaffrey, 1995 • University of Frankfurt Faculty of Medicine: 1986-1990(Völlm, 1998 • University of New Mexico in the Bachelor of Science (Biology) course: 1989-1991 (Hepner, 2002); • Portland Community College (Oregon) Science Department: 1997(Powell, 1998 • University of Santa Catarina, Biological Sciences (Brazil): 1998-1999 (Tréz, 2002); and,…”