Abstract
Computer-assisted or e-learning modules can be an effective mode of education, particularly if they incorporate interactivity and feedback. However, such modules can face barriers to adoption by faculty, particularly when they involve the use of new software. In this report, we describe the generation of e-learning modules derived using standard features of PowerPoint™ that include feedback and require active engagement by students. These modules, that we term Interactive PowerPoints™ or IPPs, have been used in a variety of settings within the pre-clerkship years of a standard medical (MD) curriculum. Our analysis demonstrates that use of IPPs as supplementary material can enhance performance on standard multiple choice exam questions and are at least equivalent in efficacy to didactic lectures for delivery of specific concepts. In addition, use of IPPs for practice Genetics problems resulted in a significant increase in student perceptions of comprehension and ability to apply knowledge. Finally, students indicated a distinct preference for blended learning experiences incorporating IPPs. Thus, IPPs represent a low-cost, easily adoptable e-learning mechanism that provides for an efficient and interactive learning experience for medical students.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Greenhalgh T. Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education. BMJ. 2001;322(7277):40–4.
Lewis KO, Cidon MJ, Seto TL, Chen H, Mahan JD. Leveraging e-learning in medical education. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2014;44(6):150–63. doi:10.1016/j.cppeds.2014.01.004.
Ruiz JG, Mintzer MJ, Leipzig RM. The impact of E-learning in medical education. Acad Med: J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2006;81(3):207–12.
Dankbaar ME, Storm DJ, Teeuwen IC, Schuit SC. A blended design in acute care training: similar learning results, less training costs compared with a traditional format. Perspect Med Educ. 2014;3(4):289–99. doi:10.1007/s40037-014-0109-0.
Daunt LA, Umeonusulu PI, Gladman JR, Blundell AG, Conroy SP, Gordon AL. Undergraduate teaching in geriatric medicine using computer-aided learning improves student performance in examinations. Age Ageing. 2013;42(4):541–4. doi:10.1093/ageing/aft061.
Sadeghi R, Sedaghat MM, Sha AF. Comparison of the effect of lecture and blended teaching methods on students’ learning and satisfaction. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2014;2(4):146–50.
Hudson JN. Computer-aided learning in the real world of medical education: does the quality of interaction with the computer affect student learning? Med Educ. 2004;38(8):887–95. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01892.x.
Longmuir KJ. Interactive computer-assisted instruction in acid–base physiology for mobile computer platforms. Adv Physiol Educ. 2014;38(1):34–41. doi:10.1152/advan.00083.2013.
Triola MM, Huwendiek S, Levinson AJ, Cook DA. New directions in e-learning research in health professions education: report of two symposia. Med Teacher. 2012;34(1):e15–20. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.638010.
Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(23):8410–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
Prince M. Does active learning work? A review of the research. J Eng Educ. 2004;93(3):223–31.
DeBate RD, Cragun D, Severson HH, Shaw T, Christiansen S, Koerber A, et al. Factors for increasing adoption of e-courses among dental and dental hygiene faculty members. J Dent Educ. 2011;75(5):589–97.
Hendricson WD, Panagakos F, Eisenberg E, McDonald J, Guest G, Jones P, et al. Electronic curriculum implementation at North American dental schools. J Dent Educ. 2004;68(10):1041–57.
Zayim N, Yildirim S, Saka O. Instructional technology adoption of medical faculty in teaching. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2005;116:255–60.
Kerry J, Chisholm E. Self-directed active learning modules for pedigree analysis and genetic risk assessment. MedEdPORTAL Publications; 2015. doi:10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10172.
Kulhavy RW, Stock WA. Feedback in written instruction: the place of response certitude. Educ Psychol Rev. 1989;1(4):279–308.
Azevedo R, Bernard RM. A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback in computer-based instruction. J Educ Comput Res. 1995;13(2):111–27.
Jonassen DH, Hannum WH. Research-based principles for designing computer software. Educ Technol. 1987;27:7–14.
Paris S, Paris A. Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educ Psychol. 2001;36(2):89–101.
Butler DL, Winne PH. Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Rev Educ Res. 1995;65(3):245–81.
Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive load theory: implications for medical education: AMEE guide No. 86. Med teacher. 2014;36(5):371–84. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.889290.
Baatar D, Piskurich J. Immune response to an allergen/helminth: an interactive learning module. MedEdPORTAL Publications; 2015. doi:10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10158.
Hardesty L. Breast imaging fundamentals: an interactive textbook (iBook and PDF Versions). MedEdPORTAL Publications; 2015. doi:10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10169.
Gaikwad N, Tankhiwale S. Interactive E-learning module in pharmacology: a pilot project at a rural medical college in India. Perspect Med Educ. 2014;3(1):15–30. doi:10.1007/s40037-013-0081-0.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Stephen Buescher, MD, and Elizabeth Chisholm for provision of source material used to generate the E-Labs and Genetics practice problems, respectively.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Esquela-Kerscher, A., Krishna, N.K., Catalano, J.B. et al. Design and Effectiveness of Self-Directed Interactive Learning Modules Based on PowerPoint™. Med.Sci.Educ. 26, 69–76 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0191-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0191-x