PBL curriculum improves medical students’ participation in small-group tutorials

Figures & data

Table

Practice points
•Asian students from a non-PBL medical curriculum participated little in discussion in small-group tutorials.
•PBL introduced in the early years of a medical curriculum could enable Asian students to participate more actively in small-group tutorials.
•Objective criterion-based assessment of student performance in small-group tutorials is feasible.
•Further research on the effect of a PBL curriculum on the quality of student discussion and learning is required.

Table 1.  Distribution of talking proportions in tutorials

	Number (%) of 1995 tutorials (n = 43)		Number (%) of 2002 tutorials (n = 46)
Talking proportions	Teacher talking	Student talking	Teacher talking	Student talking
0–20%	0	4 (9.3%)	0	2 (4.4%)
21–30%	0	8 (18.6%)	1 (2.2%)	4 (8.7%)
31–40%	0	15 (34.9%)	4 (8.7%)	11 (23.9%)
41–50%	2 (4.7%)	14 (32.6%)	13 (28.3%)	12 (26.1%)
51–60%	16 (37.2%)	2 (4.7%)	14 (30.4%)	13 (28.3%))
61–70%	14 (32.6%)	0	11 (23.9%)	3 (6.5%)
71–80%	9 (20.9%)	0	1 (2.2%)	1 (2.2%)
81–90%	2 (4.7%)	0	2 (4.3%)	0
>90%	0	0	0	0

Table 2.  Tutorial mean Valle's tutorial assessment item and scale scores

Year		#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6	#7	#8	#9	Group interaction scale (#1–#5)	Active participation Scale (#6–#9)
1995 (n = 6)	Mean (SD)	1.33 (0.817)	1.68 (1.182)	2.01 (0.818)	4.27 (0.452)	3.68 (0.312)	2.44 (0.312)	4.10 (0.211)	2.44 (0.752)	2.21 (0.950)	12.98 (2.020)	11.19 (2.047)
	Range	1.0–3.0	1.0–4.0	1.0–3.0	3.6–4.8	3.3–4.0	1.3–3.4	3.9–4.4	1.6–3.4	1.5–3.9	11.0–16.3	8.75–13.86
2002 (n = 6)	Mean (SD)	2.14 (0.994)	3.14 (1.565)	3.10 (0.401)	4.76 (0.492)	3.57 (0.823)	3.57 (0.823)	4.79 (0.235)	3.24 (0.942)	3.00 (0.571)	16.71 (1.740)	14.71 (1.454)
	Range	1.0–3.9	1.0–5.0	2.4–3.6	4.4–5.7	2.1–4.4	2.9–4.3	4.4–5.1	1.4–4.1	2.3–4.0	14.43–19.71	12.71–17.00
MWU		7.5	8.0	4.0	8.0	15.5	3.0	0.5	8.0	7.5	2.0	2.0
P		0.073	0.102	0.024	0.107	0.686	0.016	0.005	0.107	0.092	0.010	0.010

SD = standard deviation; MWU = Mann–Whitney U statistic; P = P value for Mann–Whitney U test.

Table 3.  Student mean Valle's tutorial assessment item and scale scores

Year		#1	#2	#3	#4	#5	#6	#7	#8	#9	Group interaction scale (#1–#5)	Active participation scale (#6–#9)
1995 (n = 44)	Sum	60	73	87	189	162	106	180	108	96	571	490
	Mean (SD)	1.36 (0.810)	1.66 (1.219)	1.98 (1.562)	4.30 (0.851)	3.68 (0.639)	2.41 (1.530)	4.09 (1.074)	2.45 (1.532)	2.18 (1.603)	12.98 (2.538)	11.14 (4.067)
	Range	1–4	1–4	1–5	2–6	2–5	1–6	2–6	1–5	1–5	9–19	5–21
2002	Sum	150	205	217	389	312	261	381	244	222	1273	1108
(n = 42)	Mean (SD)	2.14 (1.389)	3.14 (1.523)	3.10 (1.605)	4.76 (0.932)	3.57 (1.085)	3.69 (1.297)	4.79 (1.094)	3.24 (1.411)	3.00 (1.593)	16.71 (3.330)	14.7 (3.744)
	Range	1–4	1–6	1–6	2–6	2–6	1–5	3–6	1–5	1–5	11–25	9–21
MWU		654.0	461.5	608.5	667.0	887.5	471.5	604.0	668.0	675.0	346.0	484.5
P		0.004	<0.001	0.003	0.018	0.723	<0.001	0.004	0.019	0.021	<0.001	<0.001

SD = standard deviation; MWU = Mann–Whitney U statistic; P = P value for Mann–Whitney U test.