The Effective Achievement of Various Active Learning Managements in Clinical Chemistry Course
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of various active learning management methods in a Clinical Chemistry course being taught to 44 third-year Medical Technology students. The various active learning management methods included questioning method; think-pair-share; concept mapping; writing and producing a newsletter; and student-generated exam questions. Student learning outcomes were evaluated by pre-test and post-test, and were then analyzed using paired t-test. The effective achievement of various active learning managements was compared and analyzed by One-Way ANOVA.Our results showed that the effectiveness of all active learning managements had the average score of post-test higher than pre-test at a statistical significance level of 0.05 (p<.001). However, some active learning management methods had no statistically significant differences among the groups (p-value=0.244). Moreover, this research revealed that various active learning management methods improved the effective learning, improved participation in a community-based activities, fostered team responsibility, and created higher order thinking and critical thinking.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
เนื้อหาและข้อมูลในบทความที่ตีพิมพ์ในวารสารการศึกษาและนวัตกรรมการเรียนรู้ ถือเป็นข้อคิดเห็นและความรับผิดชอบของผู้เขียน ซึ่งกองบรรณาธิการวารสาร ไม่จำเป็นต้องเห็นด้วยหรือร่วมรับผิดชอบใด ๆ และไม่สงวนสิทธิ์การคัดลอกบทความเพื่อใช้ประโยชน์ทางวิชาการ แต่ให้อ้างอิงข้อมูลแสดงที่มาของบทความทุกครั้งที่นำไปใช้ประโยชน์
References
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bongers K. S., & Heidemann, L. A. (2020). Cross-cover curriculum for senior medical students. MedEdPORTAL, 16, 10944. doi:10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10944
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Brame, C. (2016). Active learning. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/active-learning/
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P.(2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 111(23), 8410-8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching. New York: W.H. Freeman.
McKinney, S. E., Haberman, M., Stafford-Johnson, D., & Robinson, J. (2008). Developing teachers for high-poverty schools: The role of the internship experience. Urban Education, 43(1), 68-82. doi:10.1177/0042085907305200
Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco: Josey-Bass Publishers.
Odreman, H. A., & Clyens, D. (2020). Concept mapping during simulation debriefing to encourage active learning, critical thinking, and connections to clinical concepts. Nurs Educ Perspect, 41(1), 37-38. doi:10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000445
Panich, V. (2013). Learning creativity for learner in 21st century. (1st ed.). Bangkok, Thailand: Tathata [in Thai]
Wynn-Lawrence, L. S., Bala, L., Fletcher, R. J., Wilson, R. K., & Sam, A. H. (2020). Question-Based Collaborative Learning for Constructive Curricular Alignment. Adv Med Educ Pract, 11, 1047-1053. doi:10.2147/AMEP.S280972