Active learning in undergraduate classroom dental education- a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Previous reviews on active learning in dental education have not comprehensibly summarized the research activity on this topic as they have largely focused on specific active learning strategies. This scoping review aimed to map the breadth and depth of the research activity on active learning strategies in undergraduate classroom dental education.

METHODS

The review was guided by Arksey & O'Malley's multi-step framework and followed the PRISMA Extension Scoping Reviews guidelines. MEDLINE, ERIC, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched from January 2005 to October 2022. Peer-reviewed, primary research articles published in English were selected. Reference lists of relevant studies were verified to improve the search. Two trained researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts articles for eligibility and extracted the relevant data.

RESULTS

In total, 93 studies were included in the review. All studies performed outcome evaluations, including reaction evaluation alone (n = 32; 34.4%), learning evaluation alone (n = 19; 20.4%), and reaction and learning evaluations combined (n = 42; 45.1%). Most studies used quantitative approaches (n = 85; 91.3%), performed post-intervention evaluations (n = 70; 75.3%), and measured student satisfaction (n = 73; 78.5%) and knowledge acquisition (n = 61; 65.6%) using direct and indirect (self-report) measures. Only 4 studies (4.3%) reported faculty data in addition to student data. Flipped learning, group discussion, problem-based learning, and team-based learning were the active learning strategies most frequently evaluated (≥6 studies). Overall, most studies found that active learning improved satisfaction and knowledge acquisition and was superior to traditional lectures based on direct and indirect outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

Active learning has the potential to enhance student learning in undergraduate classroom dental education; however, robust process and outcome evaluation designs are needed to demonstrate its effectiveness in this educational context. Further research is warranted to evaluate the impact of active learning strategies on skill development and behavioral change in order to support the competency-based approach in dental education.

Implementation of mind mapping with problem-based learning in prosthodontics course for Chinese dental students

BACKGROUND

The traditional Chinese dentistry classroom teaching model focuses on the instruction of knowledge details, but less on the frameworks and learners' motivation. Here, we introduced a combination of mind mapping and PBL instruction (MBL)into the prosthodontics course for Chinese dental students. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of MBL in prosthodontics and make observations from the students' perspectives, based on their response with the learning process.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 56 fourth-year undergraduates of stomatology, and these participants were randomly allocated into either the combined mind map teaching group (MBL) or the problem-based learning group (PBL) to attend the prosthodontics course. An anonymous questionnaire was also administered to both groups to evaluate the students' perceptions and experiences, using closed and open-ended items. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The students' responses to closed items indicate their experience in PBL and MBL to be positive, including increased motivation, improved memory of knowledge, enhanced discipline connection and raised teamwork, with fairly higher ratings for the MBL group. However, the tutor-guided competence scores including the memory and framework part, were significantly higher for MBL group than PBL group (two-way ANOVA, p < 0.01, p < 0.001, respectively). Meanwhile, the self-perceived competence scores including the motivation, framework and teamwork part, were significantly higher for MBL group than PBL group (two-way ANOVA, p < 0.01, p < 0.001, p < 0.05, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that MBL teaching approach can help in integration of knowledge structure and enhance clinical reasoning. MBL is an effective and well-organized method in prosthodontics course for dental students.

A review to identify key perspectives in PBL meta-analyses and reviews: trends, gaps and future research directions

In the past 50 years, the original McMaster PBL model has been implemented, experimented, revised, and modified, and is still evolving. Yet, the development of PBL is not a series of success stories, but rather a journey of experiments, failures and lessons learned. In this paper, we analyzed the meta-analyses and systematic reviews on PBL from 1992 to present as they provide a focused lens on the PBL research in the past 5 decades. We identified three major waves in the PBL research development, analyzed their impact on PBL research and practice, and offered suggestions of research gaps and future directions for the field. The first wave of PBL research (polarization: 1990-mid 2000) focused on answering the question "Does PBL work?" and the outcomes. The results were conflicting. The researchers took polarizing positions and debated over the merits of PBL throughout this wave. However, the contradictory results and the debates in fact pushed the researchers to look harder for new directions to solve the puzzle. These efforts resulted in the second wave (from outcomes to process: mid 2000-mid 2010) that focused on the question "How does PBL work?" The second wave of PBL research targeted at investigating the effects of implementation constituents, such as assessment formats or single versus curriculum wide implementations. The third wave (specialization: mid 2010 and onward) of PBL research focused on "How does PBL work in different specific contexts?" These research widened our perspectives by expanding our understanding of how PBL manifests itself in different contexts. Given the diversification of PBL and more hybrid PBL models, we suggest "Why does PBL with particular implementation characteristics for specific outcomes work or not work in the condition where it is implemented?" to be the question to answer in the next wave of PBL research.