Assessing the Effectiveness of Using Mechanistic Concept Maps in Case-Based Collaborative Learning. (February 2019) - Fischer, Krisztina
Abstract : Problem: Despite the advantages of using mechanistic concept maps (MCMs)—diagrams created individually or collaboratively by a team to foster inductive analysis of a clinical problem—in individual learning, very little is known about their benefits in collaborative learning. Approach: First-year medical and dental students (n = 170) were assigned to one of four learning groups in the Homeostasis I course, Harvard Medical School, February–March 2016. One group (n = 43) was randomly assigned to the MCM intervention; students in the remaining groups (n = 127) served as controls. Outcomes included pre- and postcourse surveys on, among other things, reasoning skills, attitudes toward teamwork, and tolerance of ambiguity; final exam scores; and qualitative responses to three open-ended questions on students' perceptions of the effects of MCMs on their learning. Outcomes: Response rates for pre- and postcourse surveys were 87/170 (51%) and 91/170 (54%). Compared with students in the control groups, students in the MCM group reported better reasoning skills ( P = .01) and attitudes toward teamwork ( P = .02). There were no significant differences in final exam scores between the groups. Students in the intervention group found MCMs more helpful in conceptual learning than their own notes and flashcards ( P = .0001) or the readiness assessment quizzes ( P = .0009). Qualitative analysis indicated MCM students routinely overcame team-learning obstacles through strategies aimed at prioritizing collaborative inductive reasoning. Next Steps: Ongoing studies are evaluating the contextual elements and best practices for optimal employment of MCMs in promoting collaborative inductive reasoning. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.