↓ Skip to main content

A model for the use of blended learning in large group teaching sessions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
285 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A model for the use of blended learning in large group teaching sessions
Published in
BMC Medical Education, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-1057-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cristan Herbert, Gary M. Velan, Wendy M. Pryor, Rakesh K. Kumar

Abstract

Although blended learning has the potential to enhance the student experience, both in terms of engagement and flexibility, it can be difficult to effectively restructure existing courses. To achieve these goals for an introductory Pathology course, offered to more than 250 undergraduate students at UNSW Sydney, we devised a novel approach. For each topic presented over 2-3 weeks, a single face-to-face overview lecture was retained. The remaining content that had previously been delivered as conventional lectures was converted into short (12-18 min) online modules. These were based on lecture slides with added animations/highlights, plus narration using edited excerpts of previous lecture recordings. The modules also incorporated interactive questions and review quizzes with feedback which used various question types. Modules were developed in PowerPoint and iSpring and uploaded to Moodle as SCORM packages. Each topic concluded with an interactive large-group session focussing on integration of the content, with in-class questions to which students could respond via the Echo360 Active Learning Platform (ALP). Overall, more than 50% of face-to-face lecture time was replaced by online modules and interactive large-group sessions. Quantitative evaluation data included usage statistics from 264 students and feedback via online survey responses from 41 students. Qualitative evaluation data consisted of reflective commentaries from 160 student ePortfolios, which were analysed to identify factors affecting learning benefits and user acceptability. All of the modules were completed by 74% of students and on average, 83.1% of students eventually passed the optional review quizzes. Notably, 88.4% of students responded to in-class questions during the integration and feedback sessions via the ALP. Student reflections emphasised that the modules promoted understanding, which was reinforced through active learning. The modules were described as enjoyable, motivating and were appreciated for their flexibility, which enabled students to work at their own pace. In transforming this introductory Pathology course, we have demonstrated a model for the use of blended learning in large group teaching sessions, which achieved high levels of completion, satisfaction and value for learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 285 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 37 13%
Student > Master 32 11%
Researcher 26 9%
Student > Bachelor 20 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Other 58 20%
Unknown 93 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 58 20%
Social Sciences 31 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 4%
Arts and Humanities 11 4%
Computer Science 11 4%
Other 55 19%
Unknown 107 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,087,599
of 23,876,482 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,208
of 3,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,809
of 333,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#40
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,876,482 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,575 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.