Student perceptions of cardiovascular physiology module format in a preclinical medical science course.xlsx

Positive active learning outcomes require student engagement with foundational, preparatory material prior to class. The current study involved thorough updating of cardiovascular physiology module format. It then examined preclinical medical student perceptions, and midterm exam performance, after using different preparatory module formats that were reviewed prior to participating in interactive classroom sessions. Modules that were initially created in Articulate Storyline were updated in Articulate Rise360 and introduced over a 3-year period. Both module styles contained the same cardiovascular physiology content, but updated Rise360 modules presented content in multiple formats to capture a variety of student learning preferences and divided each concept into several smaller topics to maintain student attention. Student perceptions of module format were assessed by examining end-of-block evaluations. In the evaluations, students rated modules, as well as other modes of instruction, using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “not at all helpful” to “extremely helpful”, or by selecting, “Did not use/NA to this block”. In addition, narrative comments that included the word ‘module’ were extracted from open-ended evaluation questions including, “Please comment about your experiences with content and organization.”, and “Which methods and/or materials were most helpful? What could have been more helpful? How?”. Narrative comments were inductively analyzed, and four common themes were identified: organizational, technical, content, and general, which were further categorized as a ‘pro’ comment or a ‘con’ comment (see Figure 1 caption for details). Three independent researchers then deductively categorized themes from the student comments and discrepancies were discussed until full agreement was reached.