A Comparison Of Learning with Classical Lecture and Demonstration Methods Versus Individually and Collaboratively Prepared Concept Maps

Abstract

IntroductionThe use of concept maps as teaching‐learning tool facilitates knowledge integration and development of meaningful learning. It was developed by Novak and Gowin and is based on Ausubel's theory of meaningful learning. Present study was undertaken to compare the learning with concept maps and classical lecture‐demonstration methods in gross anatomy and to obtain feedback of students and faculty regarding the same.MethodsA randomized cross sectional prospective study was conducted on 150 medical students of 1st year. Students were divided into 3 groups A, B and C. Group A studied “gross anatomy of foot” by developing concept maps in groups.. Group C learnt through lecture and demonstration method. Group B studied with individually prepared concept maps. Pre and posttest were conducted for all groups with pre validated questionnaire. Feedback was obtained from both students and faculty through a 5 point Likert scale. Anova and Student's T test was applied for statistical analysis.ResultThere was significant improvement in knowledge in group A and B students in comparison to group C students. This improvement was more marked in regards to high cognitive type assessment questions. 90% students found that development of concept maps helped them to understand topic better but it was time consuming.Discussion and ConclusionConcept mapping is a better learning tool in comparison to classical lecture and demonstration method. Preparation of concept maps in groups help in development of better understanding and learning of the subject than learning with classical lecture‐demonstration method and individually prepared concept maps.Support or Funding InformationNILThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.