• we

Introduction of flipped classroom teaching in UK dental schools

Thank you for visiting Nature.com. The version of browser you are using has limited CSS support. For best results, we recommend that you use a newer version of your browser (or disable Compatibility Mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure ongoing support, we are displaying the site without styling or JavaScript.
IntroductionThe flipped classroom (FC) format requires students to review theoretical topics using materials provided prior to face-to-face instruction. The goal is that because students are familiar with the material, they will get more out of their interactions with the instructor. This format has been shown to increase student satisfaction, academic performance, and cognitive development, as well as lead to higher academic achievement.
Methods. The article describes the transition of a dental and biomaterials application course in a UK dental school from a traditional lecture approach to a hybrid FC format during the 2019/2020 academic year, and compares student feedback before and after the transition.
Formal and informal feedback received from students following the changes was entirely positive.
Discussion FC shows great promise as a tool for men in clinical disciplines, but further quantitative research is needed, particularly to measure academic achievement.
A dental school in the UK has fully adopted the flipped classroom (FC) method in teaching dental materials and biomaterials.
The FC approach can be adapted to asynchronous and synchronous courses to accommodate blended learning teaching methods, which is especially relevant due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In recent years, thanks to technological advances, many new, interesting and innovative teaching methods have been described and tested. The new men’s technique is called the “flipped classroom” (FC). This approach requires students to review the theoretical aspects of the course through provided material (usually pre-recorded lectures) prior to face-to-face instruction, with the goal that as students become familiar with the topic, they gain more knowledge from contact with the instructor. time. This format has been shown to improve student satisfaction1, academic achievement, and cognitive development2,3, as well as higher academic achievement. 4,5 The use of this new teaching approach is expected to improve student satisfaction with the Applied Dental Materials and Biomaterials (ADM&B) subject in UK dental schools. The purpose of this study is to evaluate student satisfaction with a course before and after a change in theoretical teaching as measured by the Student Course Evaluation Form (SCEF).
The FC approach typically uses computer technology, so lectures are eliminated from the schedule and delivered online before teachers begin applying the concepts. 6 Since its inception in US high schools, the FC approach has become widespread in higher education. 6 The FC approach has proven successful in a variety of medical fields 1,7 and evidence of its use and success is emerging in dentistry. 3,4,8,9 Although many positive results have been reported regarding student satisfaction, 1,9 there is early evidence linking it to improved academic performance. 4,10,11 A recent meta-analysis of FC in a number of health disciplines found that FC produced significant improvements in student learning compared with traditional approaches, 12 while other studies in dental disciplines also found that it better supported the academic performance of poor students. 13.14
There are challenges in dental teaching regarding the four recognized learning styles described by Honey and Mumford 15 inspired by Kolb’s work. 16 Table 1 shows how a course could be taught using a hybrid FC approach to accommodate all of these learning styles.15
Additionally, this modified course style was expected to promote higher level thinking. Using Bloom’s Taxonomy 17 as a framework, online lectures are designed to impart knowledge and tutorials are designed to explore and develop understanding before hands-on activities move to application and analysis. The Kolb Learning Cycle 18 is an established experiential learning theory suitable for use in dental teaching, especially because it is a practical subject. The theory is based on the assumption that students learn by doing. In this case, hands-on experience in mixing and handling dental products enriches the teaching experience, deepens students’ understanding, and broadens the application of the subject. Students are provided with workbooks containing hands-on elements to support experiential learning, as illustrated in Kolb Cycle 18 (Figure 1). In addition, interactive workshops on problem-based learning have been added to the program. They were added to achieve deeper learning and encourage students to become independent learners. 19
Additionally, this hybrid FC approach is expected to bridge the generational gap between teaching and learning styles. 20 Students today are most likely to be Generation Y. This generation is generally collaborative, thrives on technology, responds to coaching learning formats, and prefers case studies with immediate feedback, 21 all of which are included in the hybrid FC approach. 11
We contacted the medical school’s Ethical Review Committee to determine whether an ethical review was required. Written confirmation was obtained that this study was a service evaluation study and therefore ethical approval was not required.
To facilitate the transition to the FC approach, in this context it was considered appropriate to undertake a major overhaul of the entire ADM&B curriculum. The proposed course is initially drawn or storyboarded 22 by the academic subject leader responsible for the course, dividing it into topics defined by his subject. Mini-lectures, called “lectures,” were adapted from previously available educational lecture materials recorded and stored as PowerPoint presentations (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) related to each topic. They tend to be short, which makes it easier for students to concentrate and reduces the likelihood of losing interest. They also allow you to create modular courses for versatility, as some topics cover multiple areas. For example, common dental impression materials are used to make removable dentures as well as fixed restorations, which are covered in two separate courses. Each lecture covering traditional lecture material was recorded as a podcast using video recording as this was found to be more effective for knowledge retention using Panopto in Seattle, USA23. These podcasts are available on the university’s Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). The course will appear on the student’s calendar and the presentation will be in Microsoft Inc. PowerPoint format with a link to the podcast. Students are encouraged to watch podcasts of lecture presentations, allowing them to comment on notes or write down any questions that come to mind at the time. Following the release of the lecture slides and podcasts, required additional classes and hands-on activities are planned. Students are verbally advised by the course coordinator that they need to review lectures before attending tutorials and practicals in order to get the most out of and contribute to the course, and this is recorded in the course manual.
These tutorials replace previous fixed-time lectures and are given before practical sessions. Teachers facilitated teaching by adapting teaching to suit their learning needs. It also provides an opportunity to highlight key points, test knowledge and understanding, enable student discussions, and facilitate questions. This type of peer interaction has been shown to promote deeper conceptual understanding. 11 Gali et al 24 found that, in contrast to traditional lecture-based teaching of dental content, tutorial-based discussions helped students connect learning to clinical application. Students also reported that they found teaching more motivating and interesting. Study guides sometimes include quizzes through OMBEA Response (OMBEA Ltd., London, UK). Research has shown that the testing effect of quizzes has a positive impact on learning outcomes in addition to assessing understanding of theoretical material presented prior to face-to-face training25. 26
As always, at the end of each semester, students are invited to provide formal feedback via SCEF reports. Compare formal and informal feedback received before changing the topic format.
Due to the small number of students on each course in the Faculty of Dentistry at the University of Aberdeen and the very limited number of staff involved in delivering ADM&B courses, it is not possible to quote student comments directly. This document is included to preserve and protect anonymity.
However, it was observed that students’ comments on SCEF mainly fell into four main categories, namely: teaching method, teaching time and availability of information and content.
As for teaching methods, before the change there were more dissatisfied students than satisfied ones. After the change, the number of students who said they were more satisfied than dissatisfied quadrupled. All comments regarding the length of instructional time with materials ranged from unanimous dissatisfaction to satisfaction. This was repeated in students’ responses to the accessibility of the material. The content of the material did not change much, and students were always satisfied with the information provided, but as it changed, more and more students responded positively to the content.
After the change to the FC blended learning method, students provided significantly more feedback via the SCEF form than before the change.
Numerical assessments were not included in the original SCEF report but were introduced in the 2019/20 academic year in an attempt to measure course acceptance and effectiveness. Course enjoyment and effectiveness of the learning format were rated on a four-point scale: strongly agree (SA), generally agree (GA), generally disagree (GD), and strongly disagree (SD). As can be seen from Figures 2 and 3, all students found the course interesting and effective, and only one BDS3 student did not find the learning format effective overall.
Finding evidence to support changes in course design is difficult due to the variety of content and styles, so professional judgment is often required. 2 However, of all the available treatments for men and the emerging evidence for the effectiveness of FC in medical education, this approach appears to be the most appropriate for the course in question, as although previous students were satisfied in terms of relevance and content. very high, but teaching is very low.
The success of the new FC format was measured by formal and informal student feedback and comparison with comments received on the previous format. As expected, students stated that they liked the FC format because they could access online materials as needed, at their own time, and use them at their own pace. This is especially useful for more complex ideas and concepts where students may want to repeat the section over and over again until they understand it. Most students were fully engaged in the process, and those who were, by definition, had more time to prepare for the lesson. Chega’s article confirms this. 7 In addition, the results showed that students valued higher quality of interaction with the tutor and learning and that the pre-practice tutorials were tailored to their learning needs. As expected, the combination of tutorials and hands-on elements increased student engagement, fun, and interaction.
Schools for dental students in Aberdeen are relatively new and relatively new. At that time, many processes were designed to be implemented immediately, but were adapted and improved as they were used to better suit the purpose. This is the case with formal course feedback tools. The original SCEF form asked for feedback on the entire course, was then refined over time to include questions about dental health and disease (an umbrella term for this topic), and finally asked for feedback specifically on ADM&B. Again, the initial report asked for general comments, but as the report progressed, more specific questions were asked about strengths, weaknesses, and any innovative teaching methods used in the course. Relevant feedback on the implementation of the hybrid FC approach has been incorporated into other disciplines. This was collated and included in the results. Unfortunately, for the purposes of this study, numerical data were not collected at the outset as this would have led to meaningful measurement of improvements or other changes in impact within the course.
As in many universities, lectures at the University of Aberdeen are not considered compulsory, even in programs regulated by external bodies such as the General Dental Council, which has a legal and statutory obligation to oversee dental education in the UK. All other courses are required, so by changing the course description to the study guide, students will be forced to take it; Increasing attendance increases participation, engagement and learning.
It has been reported in the literature that there are potential difficulties with the FC format. The FC format involves students preparing before class, often in their own time. Zhuang et al. It was found that the FC approach is not suitable for all students as it requires a high level of faith and motivation to complete the preparation. 27 One would expect that health professions students would be highly motivated, but Patanwala et al 28 found that this was not the case as some pharmacy therapy students were unable to review the pre-recorded material and were therefore unprepared to textbooks. . However, this course found that most students were engaged, prepared, and attended the face-to-face course with a good initial understanding of the course. The authors suggest that this is a result of students being explicitly directed by course management and the VLE to view podcasts and lecture slides, while advising them to view this as a prerequisite for required coursework. The tutorials and hands-on activities are also interactive and engaging, and teachers look forward to student participation. Students quickly realize that their lack of preparation is obvious. However, this can be problematic if all courses are taught this way, as students may be overwhelmed and will not have enough protected time to review all the lecture material. This preparatory asynchronous material should be built into the student’s schedule.
To develop and implement FC concepts in the teaching of academic subjects, several challenges must be overcome. Obviously, recording a podcast requires a lot of preparation time. Additionally, learning the software and developing editing skills takes a lot of time.
Flipped classrooms solve the problem of maximizing contact time for time-constrained teachers and enable the exploration of new teaching methods. Interactions become more dynamic, making the learning environment more positive for both staff and students, and changing the common perception that dental materials are a “dry” subject. Staff at the University of Aberdeen Dental Institute have used the FC approach in individual cases with varying degrees of success, but it has not yet been adopted into teaching across the curriculum.
As with other methods of delivering sessions, problems arise if the main facilitator is absent from face-to-face meetings and therefore unable to teach sessions, as facilitators play a key role in the success of the FC approach. The Education Coordinator’s knowledge must be at a high enough level to allow the discussion to go in any direction and with sufficient depth, and for students to see the value of preparation and participation. Students are responsible for their own learning, but advisors must be able to respond and adapt.
Formal teaching materials are prepared in advance, meaning courses are ready to be taught at any time. At the time of writing, during the COVID-19 pandemic, this approach allows courses to be delivered online and makes it easier for staff to work from home, as the teaching framework is already in place. Thus, students felt that theoretical learning was not interrupted as online lessons were provided as an acceptable alternative to face-to-face classes. In addition, these materials are available for use by future cohorts. The materials will still need to be updated from time to time, but the instructor’s time will be saved, resulting in an overall cost savings balanced against the initial cost of the time investment.
The transition from traditional lecture courses to FC teaching resulted in consistently positive feedback from students, both formally and informally. This is consistent with other previously published results. Further research is needed to see whether summative assessment can be improved by adopting an FC approach.
Morgan H, McLean K, Chapman S, et al. The flipped classroom for medical students. Clinical Teaching 2015;12:155.
Swanwick T. Understanding medical education: evidence, theory and practice. Second edition. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2014.
Kohli S., Sukumar A.K., Zhen K.T. et al. Dental education: lecture versus flipped and spaced learning. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2019; 16: 289-297.
Kutishat A.S., Abusamak M.O., Maraga T.N. The impact of blended learning on clinical education effectiveness and dental student satisfaction. Journal of Dental Education 2020;84:135-142.
Hafferty F. W. Beyond curriculum reform: Confronting the hidden medical curriculum. Acad Med Sci 1998;73:403-407.
Jensen JL, Kummer TA, Godoy PD. d M. Improvements in flipped classrooms may simply be a result of active learning. CBE Life Sciences Education, 2015. DOI: 10.1187/cbe.14-08-0129.
Cheng X, Ka Ho Lee K, Chang EI, Yang X. Flipped classroom method: stimulates positive learning attitudes among medical students and improves their knowledge of histology. Analytic Sci Educ 2017;10:317-327.
Crothers A, Bagg J, McCurley R. The flipped classroom for teaching preclinical dental skills – a reflective review. Br Dent J 2017; 222: 709-713.
Lee S, Kim S. Effectiveness of the flipped classroom in teaching periodontal diagnosis and treatment planning. Journal of Dental Education 2018;82:614-620.
Zhu L, Lian Z, Engström M. Using the flipped classroom in ophthalmology courses for medical, nursing, and dental students: a quasi-experimental mixed methods study. Nurse Education Today 2020;85:104262.
Gillispie W. Using the flipped classroom to bridge the gap with Generation Y. Ochsner J. 2016; 16:32-36.
Hugh KF, Law SK. The flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions: a meta-analysis. BMC Med Educ 2018;18:38.
Sergis S, Sampson DG, Pellichione L. Investigating the impact of flipped classrooms on students’ learning experiences: A self-determination theory approach. Computational Human Behavior 2018;78:368-378.
Alcota M, Munoz A, Gonzalez FE. Diverse and collaborative teaching methods: A remedial pedagogical intervention for low-scoring dental students in Chile. Journal of Dental Education 2011;75:1390-1395.
Leaver B., Erman M., Shekhtman B. Learning styles and learning strategies. Success in second language acquisition. Pages 65–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Kolb D. A. Experimental learning: Experience is a source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1984.
Dictionary.com. Available at: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Generation (accessed August 2015).
Moreno-Walton L., Brunette P., Akhtar S., DeBleu P.M. Teaching across generational divides: consensus of the 2009 Emergency Medicine Committee Scientific Conference. Akkad Emerg Med 2009;16:19-24.
Salmon J, Gregory J, Lokuge Dona K, Ross B. Experimental online development for educators: the case of a carpe diem MOOC. Br J Educational Technol 2015; 46: 542-556.


Post time: Nov-04-2024