Usage and effects of a lecture recording system on study behaviours of preclinical medical students in Thailand

Cherdsak Iramaneerat; Prowpanga Udompap; Patawee Na Bangchang; Sutheethorn Thongtan; Chuleeporn Jaruthamsopon

doi:10.11157/fohpe.v17i2.136

Authors

Cherdsak Iramaneerat Mahidol University
Prowpanga Udompap Mahidol Univeristy
Patawee Na Bangchang Mahidol University
Sutheethorn Thongtan Mahidol University
Chuleeporn Jaruthamsopon Mahidol University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v17i2.136

Keywords:

lecture recording, study behaviours, medical students, preclinical study

Abstract

Background: Many medical schools provide a lecture recording system (LRS) to allow students to view or review lectures on demand. The investigators examined how many students used an LRS and whether there is any difference in students’ study behaviours between subjects with and without an LRS.

Methods: The investigators conducted a survey among third-year preclinical medical students in a large medical school in Thailand. The questionnaire contained three parts: (1) demographic data, (2) students’ use of LRS and (3) study behaviours of students—using a modified version of the Study Behaviours Inventory (SBI-HS), to compare subjects with and without an LRS.

Results: We received 101 completed questionnaires (33% response rate). Ninety-five percent of survey respondents used the LRS, with 51% using the LRS less than 2 hours per day and 49% more than 2 hours per day. When combining scores from all items, there was no significant difference in students’ overall study behaviours between subjects with and without an LRS, t(85) = -0.77, p = 0.44. However, nine individual items showed significant differences between subjects, with eight of nine showing better study behaviours for subjects with an LRS than those without an LRS.

Conclusion: Many preclinical students used an LRS regularly. The presence of an LRS was not associated with significant changes in students’ study behaviours.

References

Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. Spence & J. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol 2). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971). The control of short-tem memory. Scientific American, 225, 82–90.

Bacro, T. R., Gebregziabher, M., & Fitzharris, T. P. (2010). Evaluation of a lecture recording system in a medical curriculum. Anatomical Sciences Education, 3(6), 300–308.

Bacro, T. R., Gebregziabher, M., & Ariail, J. (2013). Lecture recording system in anatomy: Possible benefit to auditory learners. Anatomical Sciences Education, 6(6), 376–384.

Bliss, L. B., & Mueller, R. J. (1986, April). An instrument for the assessment of study behaviours of college students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Bliss, L. B., & Vinay, D. M. A. (2004). First steps in the development of the inventario de comportamiento de estudio: The Spanish version of the Study Behaviour Inventory. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3(1), 25–37.

Cardall, S., Krupat, E., & Ulrich, M. (2008). Live lecture versus video-recorded lecture: Are students voting with their feet? Academic Medicine, 83(12), 1174–1178.

Cascaval, R. C., Fogler, K. A., Abrams, G. D., & Durham, R. L. (2008). Evaluating the benefits of providing archived online lectures to in-class math students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 61–70.

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Cognitive information processing. In M. P. Driscoll (Ed.), Psychology of learning for instruction (3rd ed.) (pp. 71–110). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Dunkin, R. (1999). Teaching and learning reinvigorated: A case study. Tertiary Education and Management, 5(4), 357–370.

Engstrand, S. M., & Hall, S. (2011). The use of streamed lecture recordings: Patterns of use, student experience and effects on learning outcomes. Practitioner Research in Higher Education, 5(1), 9–15.

Gupta, A., & Saks, N. S. (2013). Exploring medical student decisions regarding attending live lectures and using recorded lectures. Medical Teacher, 35(9), 767–771.

Johnston, A. N., Massa, H., & Burne, T. H. (2013). Digital lecture recording: A cautionary tale. Nurse Education in Practice, 13(1), 40–47.

Massingham, P., & Herrington, T. (2006). Does attendance matter? An examination of student attitudes, participation, performance and attendance? Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 3(2). Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu. au/jutlp/vol3/iss2/3

McElroy, J., & Blount, Y. (2006, December). You, me, and ilecture. Paper presented at the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) Conference, Sydney, Australia.

McNulty, J. A., Hoyt, A., Gruener, G., Chandrasekhar, A., Espiritu, B., Price, R., Jr., & Naheedy, R. (2009). An analysis of lecture video utilization in undergraduate medical education: Associations with performance in the courses. BMC Medical Education, 9(6).

Nieder, G. L., & Borges, N. J. (2012). An eight-year study of online lecture use in a medical gross anatomy and embryology course. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5(6), 311–320.

Soong, S. K. A., Chan, L. K., Cheers, C., & Hu, C. (2006, December). Impact of video recorded lectures among students. Paper presented at the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE) Conference, Sydney, Australia.

SPSS. (2002). SPSS for Windows standard version release 11.5. Chicago, IL: Author. Sutherland, P., & Badger, R. (2004). Lecturers' perceptions of lectures. Journal of

Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 277–289.

Williams, J., & Fardon, M. (2007, September). Recording lectures and the impact on student attendance. Paper presented at the Association for Learning Technology conference (ALT-C), Nottingham, UK.