Investigates GCC instructional model’s effects on engagement and skills in geriatric rehabilitation education, indicating its potential efficacy.
Population aging has driven up the urgent requirement for specially trained professionals in geriatric rehabilitation, which is imposing extra pressure on higher education institutions to provide effective, practice-oriented training. Despite increased focus on geriatric rehabilitation education, undergraduate courses encounter persistent challenges concerning student engagement, integration of theory and practice, and instructional coherence. This study investigated the effects of a structured GCC instructional model on university students’ engagement in learning, knowledge acquisition, and development of practical skills in geriatric rehabilitation education. A mixed-methods design was utilized a single-group pretest and posttest approach, complemented by semi-structured interviews. A total of 45 first-year undergraduate students participated in a 12-week instructional intervention. The quantitative results were gathered via standardized engagement questionnaires and structured evaluations of domain-specific knowledge and practical skills, subsequently analyzed using paired-samples t-tests. Qualitative data explored students’ perceptions of the GCC instructional method and the effect on their learning experiences. Results showed notable improvements in overall learning engagement (t(44) = 11.69, p < .001), as well as in theoretical knowledge and practical skills (t(44) = 9.94, p < .001) in the context of geriatric rehabilitation. Qualitative findings revealed that students perceived the instructional strategy as supporting active engagement, enhancing clarity in learning organization, and promoting meaningful integration of theory and practice. The findings suggest that a GCC instructional model might function as an effective pedagogical framework for improving engagement and learning outcomes in geriatric rehabilitation education, with potential implications for the training of future professionals in aging-related health and care services.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: