TY - JOUR
T1 - Instructional methods and cognitive and learning styles in web-based learning
T2 - Report of two randomised trials
AU - Cook, David A.
AU - Gelula, Mark H.
AU - Dupras, Denise M.
AU - Schwartz, Alan
PY - 2007/9
Y1 - 2007/9
N2 - Context: Adapting web-based (WB) instruction to learners' individual differences may enhance learning. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate aptitude-treatment interactions between learning and cognitive styles and WB instructional methods. Methods: We carried out a factorial, randomised, controlled, crossover, post-test-only trial involving 89 internal medicine residents, family practice residents and medical students at 2 US medical schools. Parallel versions of a WB course in complementary medicine used either active or reflective questions and different end-of-module review activities ('create and study a summary table' or 'study an instructor-created table'). Participants were matched or mismatched to question type based on active or reflective learning style. Participants used each review activity for 1 course module (crossover design). Outcome measurements included the Index of Learning Styles, the Cognitive Styles Analysis test, knowledge post-test, course rating and preference. Results: Post-test scores were similar for matched (mean ± standard error of the mean 77.4 ± 1.7) and mismatched (76.9 ± 1.7) learners (95% confidence interval [CI] for difference - 4.3 to 5.2l, P = 0.84), as were course ratings (P = 0.16). Post-test scores did not differ between active-type questions (77.1 ± 2.1) and reflective-type questions (77.2 ± 1.4; P = 0.97). Post-test scores correlated with course ratings (r = 0.45). There was no difference in post-test subscores for modules completed using the 'construct table' format (78.1 ± 1.4) or the 'table provided' format (76.1 ± 1.4; CI - 1.1 to 5.0, P = 0.21), and wholist and analytic styles had no interaction (P = 0.75) or main effect (P = 0.18). There was no association between activity preference and wholist or analytic scores (P = 0.37). Conclusions: Cognitive and learning styles had no apparent influence on learning outcomes. There were no differences in outcome between these instructional methods.
AB - Context: Adapting web-based (WB) instruction to learners' individual differences may enhance learning. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate aptitude-treatment interactions between learning and cognitive styles and WB instructional methods. Methods: We carried out a factorial, randomised, controlled, crossover, post-test-only trial involving 89 internal medicine residents, family practice residents and medical students at 2 US medical schools. Parallel versions of a WB course in complementary medicine used either active or reflective questions and different end-of-module review activities ('create and study a summary table' or 'study an instructor-created table'). Participants were matched or mismatched to question type based on active or reflective learning style. Participants used each review activity for 1 course module (crossover design). Outcome measurements included the Index of Learning Styles, the Cognitive Styles Analysis test, knowledge post-test, course rating and preference. Results: Post-test scores were similar for matched (mean ± standard error of the mean 77.4 ± 1.7) and mismatched (76.9 ± 1.7) learners (95% confidence interval [CI] for difference - 4.3 to 5.2l, P = 0.84), as were course ratings (P = 0.16). Post-test scores did not differ between active-type questions (77.1 ± 2.1) and reflective-type questions (77.2 ± 1.4; P = 0.97). Post-test scores correlated with course ratings (r = 0.45). There was no difference in post-test subscores for modules completed using the 'construct table' format (78.1 ± 1.4) or the 'table provided' format (76.1 ± 1.4; CI - 1.1 to 5.0, P = 0.21), and wholist and analytic styles had no interaction (P = 0.75) or main effect (P = 0.18). There was no association between activity preference and wholist or analytic scores (P = 0.37). Conclusions: Cognitive and learning styles had no apparent influence on learning outcomes. There were no differences in outcome between these instructional methods.
KW - cognition
KW - education, distance
KW - internet
KW - Clinical competence/standards
KW - Crossover studies
KW - Education, medical/methods
KW - Learning
KW - Multicentre study [publication type]
KW - Randomised controlled trial [publication type]
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548178463&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548178463&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02822.x
DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02822.x
M3 - Article
C2 - 17727530
AN - SCOPUS:34548178463
VL - 41
SP - 897
EP - 905
JO - British journal of medical education
JF - British journal of medical education
SN - 0308-0110
IS - 9
ER -