Peer instruction versus conventional group work-based teaching in a laboratory exercise on respiratory physiology: a...

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Physiology Education

Background:

• Collaborative learning strategies like peer instruction and group work are known to improve meaningful learning.
• However, a direct comparison between these two specific strategies in a laboratory setting is lacking.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the effectiveness of peer instruction versus conventional group work on immediate learning outcomes in a mandatory respiratory physiology laboratory exercise.
• To assess the impact of these collaborative strategies on student satisfaction with the laboratory assessment.

Main Methods:

• 186 second-year medical students were randomized into two groups: peer instruction (n=93) and conventional group work (n=93).
• Students solved two quizzes during a respiratory physiology laboratory exercise using their assigned collaborative strategy.
• An individual test was administered to all students post-quiz to evaluate immediate learning.

Main Results:

• No significant difference was observed in overall test scores between the peer instruction and conventional group work groups.
• Students in the peer instruction group achieved higher scores on simple, integrated questions.
• Students in the conventional group work group reported more favorable evaluations of the overall laboratory exercise assessment.

Conclusions:

• Different collaborative teaching strategies can differentially impact immediate learning and student satisfaction in laboratory settings.
• Peer instruction may be more effective for mastering specific types of questions, while conventional group work might enhance overall student perception of the learning experience.