Comparing puzzle-based and traditional lecture pedagogies in human anatomy and physiology ii: effects on student performance and intellectual engagement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48047/wkjsqp04Keywords:
puzzle-based pedagogy, lecture-based teaching, human anatomy and physiology, critical thinking, student performanceAbstract
Most lectures help students learn facts and information but may not train students to use critical thinking and solve problems. Instead, if lessons are designed as puzzles, they give students a broader knowledge framework and help them think deeply which can lead to top marks on subject tests. The study looks at how traditional lectures and exercises using puzzles work compared to each other in the human anatomy and physiology ii laboratory. Students in seven course sections were split so that half followed one teaching approach for the first half, then switched to the other half for the remaining part of the term. The final students were taught the same content but in a reverse teaching order. Assessments of student outcomes included quizzes, exams and in-class homework set up for this research. Assessments looked at how much students can accurately answer questions or draw conclusions, as well as their authentic performance according to education standards. The comparison of results revealed that students did better on standard tests when they were taught with puzzles than when they were taught through traditional lectures. With the puzzlebased strategy, quiz and exam scores were both about 2.1% and 0.4% higher than when using lectures. In brief, student improvement on typical course assessments was noticeable, but more limited when the questions required broad understanding of anatomy and physiology as taught in human anatomy and physiology ii lab
Downloads
References
REFERENCES
Tanner K, Allen D. Approaches to biology teaching and learning: understanding the wrong answers–teaching toward conceptual change. Cell Biol Educ. 2005;4:112–7. doi: 10.1187/cbe.05-02-0068. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Boaler J. Alternative approaches to teaching, learning and assessing mathematics. Eval Program Plann. 1998;21:129–41. doi: 10.1016/S0149-7189(98)00002-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Rivers DB. Using a course-long theme for inquiry-based laboratories in a comparative physiology course. Adv Physiol Educ. 2002;26:317–26. doi: 10.1152/advan.00001.2002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Thomas J. A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: The Autodesk Foundation; 2000. [Google Scholar]
Tretten R, Zachariou P. Learning about project-based learning: assessment of project-based learning in Tinkertech schools. San Rafael, CA: The Autodesk Foundation; 1997. [Google Scholar]
Falkner N, Sooriamurthi R, Michalewicz Z. Puzzle-based learning for engineering and computer science. Computer. 2010;20–28.
Fisher KM, Wandersee JH, Moody D. Mapping biology knowledge. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer; 2001. [Google Scholar]
Frey BB, Schmitt VL, Allen JP. Defining Authentic Classroom Assessment. Practical Assessments Research & Evaluation. 2012. p.17.
Newmann FM, Archbald DA. Toward a new science of educational testing and assessment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press; 1992. The nature of authentic academic achievement. [Google Scholar]
Newmann FM, Wehlage G. Authentic pedagogy and student performance. Am J Educ. 1996;104:280–312. doi: 10.1086/444136. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Newmann FM. Handbook of classroom assessment: learning, adjustment and achievement. San Diego, CA: Academic; 1997. Authentic assessment in social studies: standards and examples. [Google Scholar]
Newmann FM. Research news and comment: an exchange of views on “semantics, psychometrics, and assessment reform: a close look at ‘authentic’ assessments“. Educ Res. 1998;27(6):19–20. [Google Scholar]
Palm T. Performance assessment and authentic assessment. Practical assessments research & evaluation. 2008;13.
Barron BJS, Schwartz DL, Vye NJ, Moore A, Petrosino A, Zech L, et al. Doing with understanding: lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. J Learn Sci. 1998;7:271–311. [Google Scholar]
Kraemer EW, Lombardo SV, Lepkowski J. The librarian, the machine, or a little of both; a comparative study of three information literacy pedagogies at Oakland University. Coll Res Libr. 2007;68:330–42. doi: 10.5860/crl.68.4.330. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Merrick KE. An empirical evaluation of puzzle-based learning as an interest approach for teaching introductory computer science. IEEE Trans Educ. 2010;53:677–80. doi: 10.1109/TE.2009.2039217. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Michalewicz M. Puzzle-based learning: an introduction to critical thinking, mathematics, and problem solving. Melbourne Victoria Australia: Hybrid Publishers; 2008. [Google Scholar]
Greening T, Kay J, Kingston JH, Crawford K. Proceedings of the 1st Australasian Conference on Computer Science Education. Association for Computing Machinery. 1996. Problem-based learning of first year computer science; pp. 13–8. [Google Scholar]
Wood DF. Problem based learning. BMJ. 2008;336:971. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39546.716053.80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Rubinstein J, Dhoble A, Ferenchick G. Puzzle based teaching versus traditional instruction in electrocardiogram interpretation for medical students–a pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2009;9:4. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-9-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Parhami B. Motivating computer engineering freshmen through mathematical and logical puzzles. IEEE Trans on Educ. 2009;52:360–4. doi: 10.1109/TE.2008.930087. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Presthus W, Bygstad B. Business intelligence in college: a teaching case with real life puzzles. J Inform Technol Educ: Innovations In Practice. 2012;11.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
