Teaching with Lecture or Debate? Testing the Effectiveness of Traditional versus Active Learning Methods of Instruction

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Lecture is, arguably, the oldest known instructional technique used in the university setting. Since it was first employed in Plato's Academy, lecture has become an indispensable part of teaching favored across the college and university curriculum. Recently, this time-honored method of instruction has come under attack for its presumed inability to foster higher order cognitive and attitudinal goals (Cashin 1985; Day 1980; Frederick 1999; Renner 1993). Critics of traditional lecture-based formats call for their replacement with active learning approaches that provide students with an opportunity to meaningfully talk, interact, write, read, and reflect on the content, ideas, and issues of an academic subject (Meyers and Jones 1993, 6).

Related collections

Most cited references 22

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Undergraduate medical education: comparison of problem-based learning and conventional teaching.

Denise P C Chan, P. Nandi, Cho X. J. Chan (2000)

To review the literature on studies comparing all aspects of problem-based learning with the conventional mode of teaching. Medline literature search (1980 through 1999) and the references cited in retrieved articles. Studies and meta-analyses that compared the newer problem-based learning curriculum and the conventional lecture-based mode of teaching undergraduate medical students. Areas of comparison included the academic process; programme evaluation; academic achievement; graduates' performance, specialty choices, and practice characteristics; and the attitude of students and teachers towards the programmes. Data were extracted independently by multiple authors. Students of the problem-based learning curriculum found learning to be "more stimulating and more humane" and "engaging, difficult, and useful", whereas students of the conventional curriculum found learning to be "non-relevant, passive, and boring". Students who used the problem-based learning method showed better interpersonal skills and psychosocial knowledge, as well as a better attitude towards patients. Students using the conventional model, however, performed better in basic science examinations. Teachers tended to enjoy teaching the newer curriculum. Although the two curricula encourage different ways of learning, there is no convincing evidence of improved learning using the problem-based learning curriculum. A combination of both the conventional and newer curricula may provide the most effective training for undergraduate medical students.

0 comments Cited 48 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Problem-based learning versus lecture-based learning in a course of basic pharmacology: a controlled, randomized study.

W Antepohl, S Herzig (1999)

Since its first implementation in a medical programme at McMaster University, Canada, problem-based learning (PBL) has become a well-established means of teaching and learning medicine. Extensive research has been conducted and a number of strengths of the method are well supported. Several items, however, remain unclear although there is evidence that no relevant difference exists in factual knowledge among students from PBL and traditional curricula, a controlled, randomized study has not been conducted to address this issue. The Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne is in the process of integrating elements of PBL into its curriculum. In the spring term of 1997, after seven semesters of experience with PBL supplementing the traditional course of basic pharmacology, we did for the first time use PBL instead of the lecture-based course (LBL) and conducted a controlled prospective study to determine the effects of this intervention. One-hundred and twenty-three students were randomly assigned to either PBL (n = 63), with tutorial groups of up to nine students, or to the traditional, lecture-based course (n = 60). Analysis of the results of both groups in the examination of basic pharmacology, consisting of multiple-choice and short-essay questions, revealed similar scores with a tendency favouring PBL students in the category of short-essay questions. Hence, it seems clear that PBL does not imply a disadvantage in terms of factual knowledge. Students considered PBL to be an effective learning method and favoured it over the lecture format. Furthermore, students reported positive effects of PBL in terms of use of additional learning resources, interdisciplinarity, team work and learning fun.