Self-Directed Learning

IlluminationsSELF-DIRECTED LEARNINGReem Rachel Abraham, Subramanya Upadhya, and K. RamnarayanReem Rachel AbrahamDepartment of Physiology Melaka Manipal Medical College (Manipal Campus) International Centre for Health Sciences Manipal 576 104 Karnataka, India E-mail: , Subramanya UpadhyaDepartment of Physiology Melaka Manipal Medical College (Manipal Campus) International Centre for Health Sciences Manipal 576 104 Karnataka, India E-mail: , and K. RamnarayanDepartment of Pathology Melaka Manipal Medical College (Manipal Campus) International Centre for Health Sciences Manipal 576 104 Karnataka, India E-mail: Published Online:01 Jun 2005https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00008.2005MoreSectionsPDF (211 KB)Download PDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesGet permissionsTrack citations This paper describes self-directed learning (SDL) sessions in teaching physiology for undergraduate medical students. It is important that a student become aware of how he or she is learning (2). When students are given the opportunity to learn by themselves, they develop learning skills to become self-directed learners (3). SDL is a process in which students take the initiative with or without the help of others in diagnosing their learning needs, formulating learning goals, identifying human and material resources for learning, choosing and implementing appropriate learning strategies, and evaluating learning outcomes (1).The undergraduate medical program (Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery; MBBS) at Melaka Manipal Medical College (MMMC) (Manipal Campus), India is a 5-yr, intense academic program. In MMMC, the first-year MBBS physiology curriculum is divided into four blocks.Block 1: Basic concepts, blood, nerve, and muscle physiology.Block 2: Cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal physiology.Block 3: Endocrine, reproductive, and renal physiology.Block 4: Central nervous system and special senses.In each block, students had six SDL sessions of 2.5 h each, which included 2 h of presentation session, followed by 0.5 h of evaluation of the topic covered in the presentation. During presentation sessions, the class of 136 students were divided into four groups according to their roll numbers and each group was led by a faculty member. Students were asked to present the learning objectives individually. Due to time constraints, it was not possible for all students to present in all SDL sessions. But it was ensured that all students presented at least once in the entire block. For every learning objective presented, students were encouraged to go into discussion sessions to create group dynamics. The subject experts guided the students to focus on learning objectives whenever they deviated from it and also clarified their misconceptions. Two days after the presentation session, the evaluation was administered, which consisted of true or false questions, fill in the blanks, and short-answer questions. To determine the effectiveness of SDL, the average score obtained by the students for all of the six SDL evaluations in block 3 were compared with block 3 lecture exam scores using Student's paired t-test. Lecture exam scores were significantly lower than SDL exam scores (72 ± 0.40 vs. 76 ± 0.21). These results suggest that SDL may be an effective learning tool. Furthermore, feedback from the students (Table 1 showed more of a positive approach to this strategy, even though a few students were negative. Based on the comments and performance, we consider that SDL helps students realize that learning is a life-long process and that they are responsible for acquiring knowledge in the vast field of medicine. Table 1. Student opinions on self-directed learningIt gives me an opportunity to spend more time in self study.2.3 ± 0.08It makes me to know whether my understanding of a topic is correct or not.2.2 ± 0.08It prepares me to speak, discuss, and share my knowledge in physiology with my friends.2.3 ± 0.09It helps me to gain more confidence in studying physiology.2.4 ± 0.09It motivates me to learn physiology better.2.6 ± 0.1It helps me to be more responsible in studies.2.3 ± 0.09Values are means ± SE; n = 136 students. A scale of 1 –5, ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree was used (1 = strongly agree; 2 = agree; 3 = uncertain; 4 = disagree; 5 = strongly disagree). References1 Knowles M. Self-Directed Learning –A Guide for Learners and Teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1975.Google Scholar2 Kopelman P. Learning skills and the acquisition of clinical skills. Med Educ 31, Suppl 1: 17–19, 1997.Google Scholar3 Seale JK, Chapman J, and Davey C. The influence of assessments in students' motivation to learn in a therapy degree course. Med Educ 34: 614–621, 2000.Crossref | ISI | Google Scholar Download PDF Previous Back to Top FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation Cited ByDo learning style preferences influence the cumulative gross point average and self directed learning hours in dental students: a preliminary study24 June 2022 | BMC Medical Education, Vol. 22, No. 1COMPARATIVE STUDY OF CASE BASED LEARNING WITH TRADITIONAL TEACHING METHODS IN BIOCHEMISTRY FOR FIRST YEAR MEDICAL STUDENTS1 April 2022 | INDIAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCHDeveloping Self-Directed Learners12 December 2019 | American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Vol. 84, No. 3Prediscussion and Postdiscussion Assessment Scores in a Self-directed learning module implemented in the department of biochemistry: A comparative studyIndian Journal of Medical Specialities, Vol. 11, No. 2The Term "Self-Directed Learning"—Back to Knowles, or Another Way to Forge Ahead?10 May 2019 | Journal of Research on Christian Education, Vol. 28, No. 1LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE GAINED BY SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING AND INTERACTIVE LECTURES FOR TEACHING BIOCHEMISTRY AMONG FIRST YEAR MEDICAL STUDENTS IN GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, IDUKKI, KERALA- A COMPARATIVE STUDY16 April 2018 | Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare, Vol. 5, No. 16Modified directed self-learning sessions in physiology with prereading assignments and Pecha Kucha talks: perceptions of studentsReem Rachel Abraham, Sharmila Torke, James Gonsalves, Sareesh Naduvil Narayanan, M. Ganesh Kamath, Jay Prakash, and Kiranmai S. Rai4 January 2018 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 42, No. 1A COMPARISON OF DIDACTIC LECTURES TO SELF-DIRECTED LEARNING IN MEDICAL EDUCATION9 January 2017 | Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare, Vol. 4, No. 3Students' perceived value of physiology course activities in a Sudanese medical facultyLamis Kaddam, and Mustafa Khidir Mustafa Elnimeiri1 December 2012 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 36, No. 4An Experimental Teaching-Learning Program in HistologyJournal of Veterinary Medical Education, Vol. 38, No. 4Promoting a special learning environment for second language learning in a Chinese rural primary schoolProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 12Application of web-based periodical self-directed learning modePhysiology teaching and learning experience in a new modular curriculum at the National University of RwandaJean Bosco Gahutu1 March 2010 | Advances in Physiology Education, Vol. 34, No. 1Self-directed Learning in Health Professions Education15 July 2008 | Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, Vol. 37, No. 7 More from this issue > Volume 29Issue 2June 2005Pages 135-136 Copyright & Permissions© 2005 American Physiological Societyhttps://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00008.2005PubMed15905163History Published online 1 June 2005 Published in print 1 June 2005 Metrics