skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

Mastery versus invention learning: impacts on future learning of simulated procedural skills

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2022-05, Vol.27 (2), p.441-456 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022 ;2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. ;The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022. ;ISSN: 1382-4996 ;EISSN: 1573-1677 ;DOI: 10.1007/s10459-022-10094-x ;PMID: 35320441

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    Mastery versus invention learning: impacts on future learning of simulated procedural skills
  • Author: Brydges, Ryan ; Fiume, Andrea ; Grierson, Lawrence
  • Subjects: Comparative Analysis ; Cost control ; Diagnostic tests ; Education ; Educational objectives ; Evaluation Methods ; Evaluators ; Futures (of Society) ; Human Body ; Hypotheses ; Infants ; Knowledge ; Mastery Learning ; Medical Education ; Medical research ; Medical Students ; Outcomes of Education ; Paradigms ; Pretests Posttests ; Problem Solving ; Professions ; Rating Scales ; Simulation ; Skills ; Student Evaluation ; Teaching Methods
  • Is Part Of: Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2022-05, Vol.27 (2), p.441-456
  • Description: Background: Invention and mastery learning approaches differ in their foundational educational paradigms, proposed mechanisms of learning, and potential impacts on learning outcomes. They also differ in their resource requirements. We explored the relative effects of ‘invent and problem-solve, followed by instruction’ (PS-I) learning compared to mastery learning (i.e., standards-based training) on immediate post-test and Preparation for Future Learning (PFL) assessments. PFL assessments measure learners’ capacity to use their existing knowledge and strategies to learn about and solve novel problems. Methods: In this non-inferiority trial, pre-clerkship medical students were randomized to either PS-I, Mastery Learning (ML), or instruction then practice (CON) during simulation-based training of infant lumbar puncture (LP). After a 2-week delay, participants returned to learn and complete a PFL assessment of simulated Knee Arthrocentesis. Two independent raters assessed performances with a 5-point global rating scale. Results: Based on our non-inferiority margin, analyses showed that for both the immediate post-test and the PFL assessment, the PS-I condition resulted in non-inferior outcomes relative to the ML condition. Results for the CON condition were mixed with respect to non-inferiority compared to either PS-I or ML. Conclusions: We suggest cautiously that the PS-I approach was not inferior to the ML approach, based on skill acquisition and PFL assessment outcomes. With ML anecdotally and empirically requiring more time, greater faculty involvement, and higher costs, our findings question the preference ML has received relative to other instructional designs, especially in the healthcare simulation community. We encourage researchers to study the educational and resource impacts of instructional designs using non-inferiority designs.
  • Publisher: Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 1382-4996
    EISSN: 1573-1677
    DOI: 10.1007/s10459-022-10094-x
    PMID: 35320441
  • Source: Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
    ProQuest Central
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait