BLENDED LEARNING AS A METHOD FOR IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN DERMATOTHERAPY: A PRELIMINARY STUDY

Sri Linuwih Menaldi; Hanny Nilasari; Githa Rahmayunita; Siti Farida; Nanda L. Prasetya

doi:10.22146/jpki.55485

BLENDED LEARNING AS A METHOD FOR IMPROVING STUDENTS’ ACHIEVEMENT IN DERMATOTHERAPY: A PRELIMINARY STUDY

https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.55485

Sri Linuwih Menaldi^(1*), Hanny Nilasari⁽²⁾, Githa Rahmayunita⁽³⁾, Siti Farida⁽⁴⁾, Nanda L. Prasetya⁽⁵⁾

(1) Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia/ dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital
(2) Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia/ dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital
(3) Department of Dermatology and Venereology, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia/ dr. Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital
(4) Department of Medical Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta – INDONESIA
(5) Master of Medical Sciences Program in Medical Education, Harvard Medical School, Boston - USA
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Background: Dermatotherapy is an important topic in Dermatology and Venereology module. The time allocated for dermatotherapy topic is limited, so that the development of learning method is needed to achieve the learning objectives. Blended learning is a combination of e-learning and face to face lecture session. This method is often used when there is less time available for lecturing and limited number of teachers. This learning method is expected to be more effective and efficient for the students and also the teachers. This study was conducted to examine the effectiveness of blended learning method used in dermatotherapy topic, and to identify the obstacle of using this method.

Methods: This study is a cross sectional study, using quantitative and qualitative approach, involving 22 fifth-year medical students of Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia who enrolled in dermatology and venereology module. We collected data from questionnaire, pre and post-test, and feedback from the students. Comparison of pre-test and post-test results were analysed using paired T test, and followed by bivariate test of students’ characteristic, gadget usage and e-learning activities associated with the increased post-test score.

Results: An increased in post-test score was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05). Approximately 95,4% of students passed the final exam on the dermatotherapy subject. Bivariate analysis revealed that the number of gadgets owned, digital usage and e- learning activities did not have a significant effect on the post-test score. Based on the students’ feedback, blended learning had a positive impact on helping their learning process; however, the materials of e-learning must be interactive, informative and comprehensive. Face-to-face lecture is still an important component in learning hence it is irreplaceable.

Conclusion: Blended learning is an effective method of learning and should be considered if there is limitation of lecture time and number of teachers available. By using this method, medical students are more flexible in their study and it can be adjusted to their own learning style hence heling them understand better. Further development and improvement are needed for this method as to achieve the learning objectives.

Keywords: blended learning, dermatotherapy, medical students

Keywords

blended learning, dermatotherapy, medical students

Full Text:

PDF

References

Konsil Kedokteran Indonesia. Standar Kompetensi Dokter Indonesia. Jakarta: Konsil Kedokteran Indonesia. 2012; pp. 54-56.
Buku Rancangan Pengajaran Modul Praktik Klinik Dermatologi dan Venereologi Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia Tahun Ajaran 2017-2018. Jakarta: Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia. 2017.
Fadde PJ, Vu P. Blended online learning: benefits, challenges and misconceptions. Dalam: Lowenthal PR, York CS and Richardson JC (ed). Online learning: common misconceptions, benefits and challenges. New York: Nova Publishers. 2014; pp. 33-48.
Morton CE, Saleh SN, Smith SF, Hemani A, Ameen A, Bennie TD, Toro-Troconis M. Blended learning: how can we optimise undergraduate student engagement?. BMC Medical Educ. 2016 Dec;16(1):195.
Nortvig AM, Petersen AK, Balle SH. A literature review of the factors influencing e-learning and blended learning in relation to learning outcome, student satisfaction and engagement. Electronic Journal of E-learning. 2018;16(1):46-55.
Sharp L, Karadzhov D, Martin JL. The curious case of blended learning: an evaluation of a curriculum innovation in the Global Mental Health Master’s Programme. J Med Educ. 2018;17:149-59.
Sandars JE, Frith GS. Mobile learning (m-learning). Dalam: Dent JA, Harden RM. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers. Edisi ke-4. London: Churchill Livingstone. 2013; pp. 231-36.
Sung YH, Kwon IG, RYU E. Blended learning on medication administration for new nurses: Integration of e-learning and face-to-face instruction in the classroom. Nurse Educ Today. 2008;28:943-52.
Maryani Y. Aplikasi E-learning sebagai model pembelajran berbasis teknologi informasi di Jurusan Kesehatan Gigi Poltekkes Lemenkes Pontianak. Jurnal Vokasi. 2013;9:27-39.
Fandianta, Sanjaya GY. Widyandana. Meningkatkan pengetahuan mahasiswa dengan memberikan fleksibilitas belajar mengajar melalui metode blended learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia. 2013;2(2):1-8.
Wright BM. Blended learning: student perception of face-to-face and online EFL lessons. Indones. J. Appl. Linguist. 2017; 7: 64-71
Tang CM, Chaw LY. Digital Literacy: A Prerequisite for Effective Learning in a Blended Learning Environment? Electronic Journal of E-learning. 2016;14:54-65.
Shantakumari N, Sajith I. Blended learning: The student viewpoint. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2015;5:323-28.
Langenau EE, Lee R, Fults M. Blended learning educational format for third-year paediatrics clinical rotation. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2017 April; 117: 234-43. https://doi.org/10.7556/jaoa.2017.041
Shimizu I, Nakazawa H, Sato Y, Wolfhagen IHAP, Konings KD. Does blended problem-based learning make Asian medical students active learners?: a prospective comparative study. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19:147-55.