Preference and Satisfaction Regarding Learning Methods Among Medical Students of The University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: To find the most efficient approach to learning, this study assessed preference, satisfaction and factors associated with learning methods among medical students at the University of Port Harcourt.
Materials and methods: A cross-sectional study design with a multi-stage sampling method was employed in collecting data from 363 registered 400-600-level medical students at the university. Data collected were analysed using IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0.
Results: A total of 363 respondents with a mean age of 23.8±2.9 years were interviewed. 161(44.4%) of them preferred in-person learning, 36(9.9%) preferred virtual learning, and 166(45.7%) preferred the hybrid method. With the in-person learning, 173(47.7%) were satisfied and 92(25.3%) very satisfied. 150(41.3%) were satisfied with virtual learning and 22(6.1%) were very satisfied. 177(48.8%) were satisfied with hybrid learning, 95(26.2%) were very satisfied. Some factors influenced preference for method of learning, interaction with teachers and colleagues being the most considered (32%). Statistically significant relationships were observed between ‘sex’ (P=0.009), ‘level of study’ (P=0.001), ‘access to the device for virtual learning’ (P=0.040), ‘levels of satisfaction from methods of learning’ (p-values<0.001) and preferred method of learning. There was no statistically significant relationship between ‘age’, ‘marital status’, ‘religion’ and preferred methods of learning (p-values >0.05).
Conclusion: The method employed in learning is important to achieve effectiveness. The virtual learning method was the least preferred, while the hybrid method was the most preferred. The provision of necessary equipment and network facilities would improve virtual learning, and these are recommended.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Journal is owned, published and copyrighted by the Nigerian Medical Association, River state Branch. The copyright of papers published are vested in the journal and the publisher. In line with our open access policy and the Creative Commons Attribution License policy authors are allowed to share their work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author.
The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations. While the advice and information in this journal are believed to be true and accurate on the date of its going to press, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein.
TNHJ also supports open access archiving of articles published in the journal after three months of publication. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g, in institutional repositories or on their website) within the stated period, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). All requests for permission for open access archiving outside this period should be sent to the editor via email to editor@tnhjph.com.
How to Cite
References
1. Oxford University Press. what is learning? [Internet]. Available from: https://www.oup.com.au/media/documents/higher-education/he-samples-pages/he-teaches-ed-landing-page-sample-chapters/NAGEL_9780195519655_SC.pdf
2. University F. Types of online learning. Available from: https://www.fordham.edu/about/leadership-and-administration/administrative-offices/office-of-the-provost/provost-office-units/online-learning/types-of-online-learning/
3. UoPeople writers of. In-person Learning v/s Online Learning: What’s Better? [Internet]. 2022; Available from: https://www.uopeople.edu/blog/in-person-learning-vs-online-learning/
4. Nenagh K, Rachel G. Face-to-Face or Face-to-Screen? Undergraduates’ opinions and test performance in classroom vs. online learning. 2014;
5. Carla QP, Angelina SM, Anna CC, Pilar PH. Online vs. Classroom Learning: Examining Motivatinal and self-regulated learning strategies among vocational education and training students. 2019;10(2795).
6. Imel S. E-learning - Trends and Issues Alert (Report No 40). Off Educ Res Improv Washington, DC 2002;
7. Otter RR, Seipel S, Graeff T, Alexander B, Borniko C, Gray J, et al. Comparing student and faculty perceptions of online and traditional courses. Internet High Educ 2013;19:27–35.
8. Tucker B, Halloran P, Price C. Student perceptions of the teaching in online learning: an Australian university case study, in Research and Development in Higher Education: The Place of Learning and Teaching. Auckl High Educ Res Dev Soc Australas 2013;36:470–84.
9. Xu M. Analysis on Online Learning Environment Construction. 2016;(Icemet):556–60.
10. Hajhashemi K, Anderson N, Jackson C, Caltabiano N. Online Learning: Increasing Learning Opportunities. IJAEDU- Int E-Journal Adv Educ 2017;3(7):184–184.
11. Haruna HA, Kabara MY, Enriquez A. Face-to-face, online, or hybrid learning in post COVID-19 recovery? Scrutinizing Nigerian students’ Preferences. J Educ Manag Instr 2022;2(2):63–74.
12. Kabir A, David J. Challenges of Online Learning in Nigeria.
13. Cole, M. T., Shelley, D. J., & Swartz LB. Online instruction, e-learning, and student satisfaction: A three-year study. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(6). 2014; Available from: https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i6.1748
14. Sanora S. English Studentsâ€TM Satisfaction with Online Learning at Class. Teach English Lang Learn English J 2022;1(3):184–99.
15. Lee S, Choi J gab. College students’ perceptions of online learning: A study on learners’ satisfaction and experiences in online general English course.
16. Odongo CO, Talbert-Slagle K. Training the next generation of Africa’s doctors: Why medical schools should embrace the team-based learning pedagogy. BMC Med Educ 2019;19(1)
17. Parve S, Ershadi A, Karimov A, Dougherty A, Ndhlovu CE, Chidzonga MM, et al. Access, attitudes and training in information technologies and evidence-based medicine among medical students at University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences. Afr Health Sci 2016;16(3):860–4.
18. Abualadas HM, Xu L. Achievement of learning outcomes in non-traditional (online) versus traditional (face-to-face) anatomy teaching in medical schools: A mixed method systematic review. Clin Anat 2023;36(1):50–76.
19. Unnikrishnan K. Menon a, Suja Gopalakrishnan b, Sumithra N. Unni C c, Riju Ramachandran d, Poornima Baby e, Anu Sasidharan f NR g. Perceptions of undergraduate medical students regarding institutional online teaching-learning programme. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377123721000137#:~:text=Conclusions,learning programme were also obtained.
20. Okoye HC, Meka IA, Angela Ogechukwu Ugwu, Isah Adagiri Yahaya, Ochuko Otokunefor, Olugbenga Olalekan Ojo EOU. Perception of problem based learning versus conventional teaching methods by clinical medical students in Nigeria. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31692835/#:~:text=Of all the participants%2C 257,suitable for all medical students.
21. No SNREG. University of port harcourt 2012/2013. 2013;1–66.
22. Chima UD, Ofodile EAU. Climate change mitigation and adaptation capabilities of avenue tree species at the University of Port Harcourt , Nigeria. 2015;6(10):40–9.
23. Suresh K, Chandrasekara S. Sample size estimation and power analysis for clinical research studies.
24. Yarhere IE, Obuzor IO, Fomsi E. Online Learning Using Google Classroom: Undergraduate Medical Students and Paediatric Residents Perspectives in the University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Int J Trop Dis Heal 2020;41(18):8–15.
25. Data K. How to Determine Samples Size using Proportionate Stratified Random Sampling. 2022;Available from: how-to-determine-samples-size-using-proportionate-stratified-random-sampling/
26. National Association of Resident Doctors of Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Medicine. Med J 2015;24(1):17–27.
27. Chinawa JM, Manyike P, Chukwu B. Assessing medical students’ perception of effective teaching and learning in Nigerian medical school. 2015;Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25807674/
28. Anyaehie USB, Nwobodo E, Oze G, Nwagha UI, Orizu I, Okeke T, et al. Medical students’ evaluation of physiology learning environments in two Nigerian medical schools. Am J Physiol - Adv Physiol Educ 2011;35(2):146–8.
29. Hameed T, Husain M, Jain SK, Singh CB, Khan S. Online Medical Teaching in COVID-19 Era: Experience and Perception of Undergraduate Students. Maedica (Buchar) [Internet] 2020;15(4):440–4. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33603900%0Ahttp://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=PMC7879367
30. Chowdhury S, Chakraborty P pratim. Universal health coverage ‑ There is more to it than meets the eye. J Fam Med Prim Care [Internet] 2017;6(2):169–70. Available from: http://www.jfmpc.com/article.asp?issn=2249-4863;year=2017;volume=6;issue=1;spage=169;epage=170;aulast=Faizi
31. Li S, Zhang C, Liu Q, Tong K. E-Learning during COVID-19: perspectives and experiences of the faculty and students. BMC Med Educ [Internet] 2022;22(1):1–11. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-022-03383-x
32. Dost S, Hossain A, Shehab M, Abdelwahed A, Al-Nusair L. Perceptions of medical students towards online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national cross-sectional survey of 2721 UK medical students. BMJ Open 2020;10(11):1–10.
33. Obi IE, Charles-Okoli AN, Agunwa CC, Omotowo BI, Ndu AC, Agwu-Umahi OR. E-learning readiness from perspectives of medical students: A survey in Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract 2018;21(3):293–300.
34. Okoye HC, Meka IA, Ugwu AO, Yahaya IA, Otokunefor O, Ojo OO, et al. Perception of problem based learning versus conventional teaching methods by clinical medical students in Nigeria. Pan Afr Med J 2019;33:2–7.
35. Ekenze O, Okafor C, Ekenze S. High Internet awareness and proficiency among medical undergraduates in Nigeria: A likely tool to enhance e-learning/instruction in Internal Medicine. Int J Med Heal Dev 2019;24(1):9.
36. Amirnia M, Hosseini FM, Hejazi S e yed A h mad, Alikhah H. Level of Satisfaction among C o ntinuing Medical Education Participants of e - Learning Programs at Tabriz University of Medical Sciences in 2010. Res Dev Med Educ [Internet] 2012;1(1):21–3. Available from: http://irimoh.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpZy9DsIwDIQtxBMggWDrCyClTZqftYgCG0P3yLFdNkC8_4BbGNhZvVjy4O9OOh1AFZw36EtoSXk31qSMFUGTDFskTDjXCcXTNXW9HX6-eb-ChdzXcOmPw-G8n-Jh-fnpXMhTC_I8eLxu-XvUTFE8Fvai0HHIQc1WUAAlhRSTChO7gaWaaNlCVepxDA2Fxog4
37. Lee SJ, Park J, Lee YJ, Lee S, Kim WH, Yoon HB. The feasibility and satisfaction of an online global health education course at a single medical school: A retrospective study. Korean J Med Educ 2020;32(4):307–15.
38. Sorokina M.A., Koichubekov B.K., Omarbekova N.K., Zhamantayev O.K. HAD. Student satisfaction with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. 2023; Available from: https://doi.org/10.59598/ME-2305-6045-2023-108-3-48-57
39. Aghaalikhani, Hossein & Ahmadi E. Research Article Research Article. Arch Anesthesiol Crit Care [Internet] 2018;4(4):527–34. Available from: http://www.globalbuddhism.org/jgb/index.php/jgb/article/view/88/100
40. Agarwal S, Kaushik JS. Student’s Perception of Online Learning during COVID Pandemic. Indian J Pediatr 2020;87(7):554.