Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain

  • 제30권1호
  • /
  • Pages.35-44
  • /
  • 2005
  • /
  • 2288-9272(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2383-8493(eISSN)
대한안면통증구강내과학회 (Korean Academy of Orofacial Pain and Oral Medicine)
권호 표지

교재중심 강의와 문제중심학습 방식이 기초의학에서 과학적 추론에 미치는 효과 비교

A Comparison of Effect of Lecture-Based Learning and Problem-Based Learning on Scientific Reasoning in Basic Medicine

  • 김현아 (서울대학교 치과대학 치의학 교육실) ;
  • 김각균 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강미생물학/면역학교실) ;
  • 이승우 (서울대학교 치과대학 구강내과진단학교실)
  • Kim, Hyeon-A (Office of Educational Development, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Kack-Kyun (Department of Oral Microbiology & Immunology, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Lee, Sung-Woo (Department of Oral Medicine & Oral Diagnosis, College of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • 발행 : 2005.03.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 예비연구는 강의중심학습 (LBL) 방식 과 문제중심학습 (PBL) 방식이 기초의학 지식의 이해력의 향상에 미치는 영향을 사후-사전 검사의 변화량의 차이의 비교를 통해서 그리고 과학적 추론을 동반한 반 구조화된 문제해결의 질에 미치는 영향을 사후 검사의 차이의 비교를 통해서 평가하는 것이 목적이다. 이 반 구조화된 문제는 다섯 개- 샘플 크기, 원인과 결과의 연구설계, 위험요인 구성, 데이터의 통계 분석, 결과 해석- 의 요소를 포함하고 있다. 본 실험은 2004년 이 주에 걸쳐 서울대학교 치과대학 100명의 학부 학생들을 대상으로 실시되었다. 상이한 두 학습들이 실시되기 전 과 후에 감염방지와 예방에 관한 48개의 사지 혹은 오지 선다형의 문제가 학생들에게 주어졌다. 또 두 학습이 종결된 후에 역학관련 반 구조화된 문제를 해결하도록 하는 과제를 통하여 문제해결의 능력에 미치는 두 학습 방식의 영향을 분석하였다. 사전-사후 테스트의 결과 기초의학 지식의 이해 향상 정도는 두 그룹 간의 유 의미한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 반면, 반 구조화된 문제해결의 질은 문제중심학습 방식이 유 의미하게 높았으며 (p=.029), 특히 문제 해결 과정에서 나타난 인과성 연구설계 (p=.000)와 결과 해석(p=.001)에 관한 과학적 추론의 점수가 유 의미하게 우수하였다. 결론적으로 동일한 시간 동안 문제중심학습 방식은 강의중심학습 방식에 비해 하위 기초지식의 이해를 위한 학습 환경에서 불리하지 않았을 뿐만 아니라 상위 인지 활동인 문제해결 과정에서 과학적 추론을 개발하는데 공헌 하였다.

Purpose: The aim of this preliminary study was to evaluate the effect of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) curriculum on development of comprehension of basic medical knowledge and quality of semi-structured problem solving including scientific reasoning skill. This scientific reasoning contained five components including: size of simple, design of research cause-effect, construction of risk factor, analysis statistic of data, interpretation of result. Materials and Methods: Seoul National University Dental students (100) participated in this experience during two weeks, 2004. Forty eight multiple-choice questions (MCQ) concerned "Infection Control and Prevention" were asked before and after two sections of Lecture-Based Learning (LBL) and PBL (pretest-posttest control group design). A semi-structured problem in epidemiological research was asked to these students after two sections (posttest-only control group design). Data (mean and SD) were analysed using the t Test for two independent samples (p<.05), comparing PBL versus LBL. Results: Our analyse of scores show no difference between LBL and PBL in the development of comprehension of "Infection Control and Prevention". The quality problem solving (epidemiological research) was significantly different between the two groups (p=.029); specially, two components' scores of reflection on scientific reasoning cause-effect (p=.000) and interpretation of result (p=.001) were significantly better for PBL than for LBL. Conclusion: Theses results indicate that comparing LBL and PBL, PBL curriculum have not been disadvantaged in comprehension of basic knowledge, and have contributed to develop the scientific reasoning in problem solving.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Barrows H. Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, 1994, Springfield
  2. 강인애. PBL의 이론과 실제. 서울, 2003, 문음사, 19-36
  3. Fincham AG, Shuler CF. The Changing Face of Dental Education: The Impact of PBL. Journal of Dental education, 2001;65(5):406-421
  4. Woods DR. Problem-based Learning: How to Gain the Most from PBL. Hamilton, 1994, McMaster University, 170
  5. Distlehorst LH, Robbs R. A Comparison of Problem-Based Learning and Standard Curriculum Students: Three Tears of Retrospective Data. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 1998;10(3):131-137
  6. McParland M, Noble LM, Livingston G. The effectiveness of problem-based learning compared to traditional teaching in undergraduate psychiatry. Med Educ 2004;38(8):859-67 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01818.x
  7. Susarla SM, Bergman AV, Howell TH, Karimbux NY. Problem-based learning and research at the Harvard School of Dental Medicine: a ten-year follow-up. J Dent Educ 2004;68(1):71-76
  8. 대한구강생물학회-Samaranayake. 치의학을 위한 미생물학. 서울, 2004, 범문사
  9. Harnadek A. Critical thinking: problem solving, Reasoning, Logic and Arguments (Book 2). NJ, 1981, Prentice-Hall
  10. Klopfer LE. Evaluation of learning in science. In Bloom BS, Hastings JT, Madaus QF. Handbook on formative and sommative evaluation of student learning. NY, 1974, McGraw-Hill
  11. Walters JA, Croen LG, Weissman ZB, Reichgott MJ. A small Group, Problem-Based Learning Approach to Preparing Students to Retake Step 1 of the United States Medical Licensing Examination. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 1999;11(2):85-88 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328015TL110205
  12. Distlehorst LH, Robbs RS. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 1998;10(3):131-137 https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328015TLM1003_2
  13. Herzig S, Linke RM, Marxen B, Börner U, Antepohl W. Long-term follow up of factual knowledge after a single, randomised problem-based learning course. BMC Med Educ 2003;3(1):3
  14. Vernon DT, Blake RL. Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine 1993;68:550-563 https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199307000-00015
  15. Barrows H. Pickell G. Developing Clinical Problem Solving Skills: A Guide to More Effective Diagnosis and Treatment. New York, 1991, Norton
  16. Alessi SM, Trollip SR. Multimedia for learning: Methods and development. 3rd ed., Boston, 2001, Allyn & Bacon
  17. Schon DA. Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco, 1990, Jossey Bass