Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of various innovative learning methods in health science classrooms: a meta-analysis

  • Published:
Advances in Health Sciences Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study reports the results of a meta-analysis of the available literature on the effectiveness of various forms of innovative small-group learning methods on student achievement in undergraduate college health science classrooms. The results of the analysis revealed that most of the primary studies supported the effectiveness of the small-group learning methods in improving students’ academic achievement with an overall weighted average effect-size of 0.59 in standard deviation units favoring small-group learning methods. The subgroup analysis showed that the various forms of innovative and reform-based small-group learning interventions appeared to be significantly more effective for students in higher levels of college classes (sophomore, junior, and senior levels), students in other countries (non-U.S.) worldwide, students in groups of four or less, and students who choose their own group. The random-effects meta-regression results revealed that the effect sizes were influenced significantly by the instructional duration of the primary studies. This means that studies with longer hours of instruction yielded higher effect sizes and on average every 1 h increase in instruction, the predicted increase in effect size was 0.009 standard deviation units, which is considered as a small effect. These results may help health science and nursing educators by providing guidance in identifying the conditions under which various forms of innovative small-group learning pedagogies are collectively more effective than the traditional lecture-based teaching instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

References marked with an asterisk “*” are the primary studies included in the meta-analytic review

  • Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1), 52–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association of Colleges of Nursing (2008). The essentials of baccalaureate education for professional nursing practice. Retrieved from: http://www.aacn.nche.edu/education-resources/BaccEssentials08.pdf.

  • Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Bayard. B. L. (1994). Problem based learning in dietetic education: a descriptive and evaluative case study and an analytical comparison with a lecture-based method. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

  • *Basak, T., & Yedlin, D. (2014). Comparison of the effects of cooperative learning and traditional learning methods on the improvement of drug-dose calculation skills of nursing students undergoing internships. Health Education Journal, 73(3), 341–350. doi:10.1177/0017896912471136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Beachey. W. D. (2004). A comparison of problem—based learning and traditional curricula in baccalaureate therapy education. Dissertation, University of North Dakota.

  • *Beers, G. W. (2005). The effect of teaching method on objective test scores: Problem-based learning versus lecture. Journal in nursing education, 4, 207–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Bosworth. T. L. (2000). Effects of collaborative versus solitary interactive video learning on baccalaureate nursing student knowledge acquisition and performance of cardiac auscultation. Dissertation, University of Connecticut.

  • Cartney, P. (2006). The emotional impact of learning in small groups: Highlighting the impact on student progression and retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), 77–91.

  • Cheng, C., Liou, S., Tsai, H., & Chang, C. (2014). The effects of team-based learning on learning behaviors in the maternal-child nursing course. Nurse Education Today, 34, 25–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Choi, E., Lindquist, R., & Song, Y. (2014). Effects of problem-based learning vs. traditional lecture on Korean nursing students’ critical thinking, problem-solving, and self-directed learning. Nurse Education Today, 34, 52–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooperstein, S., & Kocevar-Weidinger, E. (2004). Beyond active learning: A constructivist approach to learning. Reference Services Review, 32(2), 141–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Daodee, S., Crabtree, K., & Vandenberghe, R. (2006). Improving critical thinking ability of nursing students through cooperative learning. Thai Journal of Nursing Research, 10, 46–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bosche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem based learning: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Fernández-Santander, A. (2008). Cooperative learning combined with short periods of lecturing. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36, 34–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • General Medical Council (2002). Tomorrow’s doctors. Retrieved from www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/GMC_tomorrows_doctors.pdf.

  • *Heather, S. (2008). Comparison of problem based learning and traditional lecture instruction on critical thinking, knowledge and application of strength and conditioning. Dissertation, University of North Carolina.

  • Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hwang, W., Wang, C., & Sharples, M. (2007). A study of multimedia annotation of web- based materials. Journal on Computers & Education, 48(4), 680–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iwasiw, C. L., & Goldenburg, D. (1993). Peer teaching among nursing students in the clinical area: Effects on student learning. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18, 659–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. MN: Interaction Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. (1998). Cooperative learning returns to college: What evidence is there that it works? Change, 30(4), 27–35.

  • Kalaian, S. A. (2017). Pedagogical approaches for the 21st century student driven learning in STEM classrooms. In N. A. Alias & J. E. Luaran (Eds.), Student-driven learning strategies for the 21st century classroom (pp. 72–86). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-1689-7.ch006.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kalaian, S. A., & Kasim, R. M. (2015). Small-group versus competitive learning in computer science classrooms: A meta-analytic review. In R. Queirós (Ed.), Innovative teaching strategies and new learning paradigms in computer programming (pp. 46–64). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-7304-5.ch003.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kalaian, S. A., & Kasim, R. M. (2014). A meta-analytic review of studies of the effectiveness of small-group learning methods on statistics achievement. Journal of Statistics Education. Retrieved from www.amstat.org/publications/jse/v22n1/kalaian.pdf.

  • Kalaian, H. A., Mullan, P. B., & Kasim, R. M. (1999). What can studies of problem-based learning tell us? Synthesizing and modeling PBL effects on national board of medical examination performance: hierarchical linear modeling meta-analytic approach. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 4(3), 209–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lewis, K. E., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1987). The problem-based learning approach in baccalaureate nursing education: How effective is it? Nursing Papers, 19, 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Lin, C., Lu, M., Chung, C., & Yang, C. (2010). A comparison of problem based learning and conventional teaching in nursing ethics education. Journal on nursing ethics, 17, 373–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, B. L. (1984). Cooperative learning in interdisciplinary education for the allied health professions. Journal of Allied Health, 13, 83–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Lyons, E. M. (2008). Examining the effects of problem-based learning and NCLEX-RN scores on the critical thinking skills of associate degree nursing students in a Southeastern Community College. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 5(1), 1–17. doi:10.2202/1548-923X.1524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (2004). Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Advisory Council on Nurse Education and Practice (2010). Addressing new challenges facing nursing education: Solutions for a transforming healthcare environment. Eighth Annual Report to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Congress.

  • National Research Council (2001). Educating teachers of science, mathematics, and technology/new practices for the new millennium. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.

  • National Science Board (2003). The science and engineering workforce realizing America’s potential, NSB 03-69. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/documents/2003/nsb0369/nsb0369.pdf.

  • National Science Board (2012). Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/pdf/seind12.pdf.

  • National Science Board (2016). Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsb20161/uploads/1/nsb20161.pdf.

  • National Science Foundation (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: Report by the Advisory Committee to the National Science Foundation, Directorate for Education and Human Resources.

  • Office of Science and Technology Policy (2006). American competiveness initiative. Retrieved from http://ostp.gov/html/AC|Booklet.pdf.

  • *Penjvini, S., & Shahsawari, S. (2013). Comparing problem based learning with lecture based learning on medicine giving skill to newborn in nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 3(9), 53–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rideout, E., England-Oxford, V., Brown, B., Fothergill-Bourbonnais, F., Ingram, C., & Benson, G. (2002). A comparison of problem-based and conventional curricula in nursing education. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 7(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sangestani, G., & Khatiban, M. (2013). Comparison of problem-based learning and lecture-based learning in midwifery. Nurse Education Today, 33, 791–794. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.03.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sevening, D., & Baron, M. (2003). A comparison of traditional teaching methods and problem-based learning in an addiction studies class. Journal of Teaching in the Addictions, 1(2), 27–42. doi:10.1300/J188v01n02_04.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, I., & Kim, J. (2013). The effect of problem-based learning in nursing education: a meta-analysis. Advances in Health Science Education, 18, 1103–1120. doi:10.1007/s10459-012-9436-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sé, A. B., Passos, R. M., Ono, A. H., & Hermes-Lima, M. (2008). The use of multiple tools for teaching medical biochemistry. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(1), 38–46. doi:10.1152/advan.00028.2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. J. (1984). A comparison of cooperative and individualistic learning in associate degree nursing students. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.

  • Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis”. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Szogedi, I., Zrinyi, M., & Belthem, J. (2009). Training nurses for CPR: Support for the problems based approach. European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 9(1), 50–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Tiwari, A., Lai, P., So, M., & Yuen, K. (2006). A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Medical Education, 40, 547–554. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varma-Nelson, P., Cracolice, M. S., & Gosser, D. K. (2004). Partnership for transforming the learning environment. In Proceedings of the 29th Anniversary Symposia of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

  • Vernon, D. T., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68(7), 550–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of the higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, P., Rowland, A. B., & Pesis-Katz, I. (2012). Peer-led team learning model in a graduate-level nursing course. Journal of Nursing Education, 51(8), 471–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (1991). Changing medical education: An agenda for action. Geneva: Offices of the World Health Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. Geneva: Offices of the World Health Organization. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/hrh/resources/framework_action/en/.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is a subset of a larger meta-analytic project, which had been supported by a grant from the Research and Evaluation in Science and Engineering (REESE) Program of the National Science Foundations (Award # 0815682). The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of the National Science Foundation. We also extent our thanks to Professor Geoffrey Norman, Editor in Chief of the Journal of “Advances in Health Sciences Education”, and the two anonymous referees for their valuable and helpful comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI, USA

    Sema A. Kalaian

  2. Indiana Tech University, Fort Wayne, IN, USA

    Rafa M. Kasim

Authors
  1. Sema A. Kalaian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafa M. Kasim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sema A. Kalaian.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kalaian, S.A., Kasim, R.M. Effectiveness of various innovative learning methods in health science classrooms: a meta-analysis. Adv in Health Sci Educ 22, 1151–1167 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-017-9753-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-017-9753-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation