Medical education in the context of expedited digitalization of educational process during the COVID-19 pandemic

Downloads

Authors

  • O.A. Uspenskaya 1, PhD in Medical Sciences, associate professor of the Therapeutic dentistry Department
    ORCID ID: 0000-0003-2395-511X
  • S.A. Spiridonova 1, PhD in Medical Sciences, associate professor of the Therapeutic dentistry Department
  • O.M. Bragina 1, PhD in Medical Sciences, associate professor of the Prosthodontics Department
    ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8867-2885
  • K.A. Ruzina 1, 4th year student at the Dental faculty
    ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6064-1649
  • 1 Privolzhsky Research Medical University, 603005, Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia

Abstract

Due to the pandemic caused by the coronavirus infection and universities’ switching to distance learning, digitalization of the educational process accelerated significantly. Digital technologies allow improving the quality of education, contribute to development of self-checking skills in students. However, the traditional educational systems are unable to adapt quickly to new methods of teaching, which can result in deviant behavior among students. The objective of the research — to study the level of student satisfaction with the effectiveness and quality of distance learning in the Privolzhsky Research Medical University (Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia).
Materials and methods.
273 students took part in the study, during which they completed an anonymous online survey regarding the distance learning format. The students were asked to assess their psycho-emotional status using the HAM (Health, Activity, Mood) test, to assess the quality of the knowledge gained and to propose measures to improve the distance learning process.
Results.
The way the distance learning was organized at the university was highly appreciated by 29.4% of the surveyed students, 35.3% of the students were satisfied with the remote portal operation, 35.3% of the students were dissatisfied. All 100% of the respondents identified the absence of demonstration of practical skills, the impossibility of practicing them as disadvantages of distance learning, 48.3% of the respondents noted the lack of “live” communication with the instructor, 51.3% — noted the absence of “teamwork”.
Conclusions.
It was discovered that a student’s personal interest in the educational process is the major factor influencing the quality of education. To achieve a successful transition to distance learning it is necessary to organize it with a high quality and maintain student-teacher and student-student interaction in the distance format. The positive aspect of distance learning is that huge volume of educational material was created in the shortest possible time, new educational platforms and new communication skills were mastered.

Key words:

digital educational environment, COVID-19, HAM test, distance learning

For Citation

[1]
Uspenskaya O.A., Spiridonova S.A., Bragina O.M., Ruzina K.A. Medical education in the context of expedited digitalization of educational process during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical Dentistry (Russia).  2021; 24 (2): 136—140

References

  1. Loyko O., Dryga S., Park J., Palianov M. Modern professional education in the global society: comparative study. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 206: 464—8. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.10.084.
  2. Csikosova A., Teplicka K., Senova A. Communication and humanization of university education through e-learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 46: 2978—82. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.600.
  3. Efremova O.N., Plotnikova I.V., Pavlik N.B. Evaluation of using of distant technologies in educational process from position of satisfaction of students. Alma Mater (Vestnik of high school). 2017; 5: 70—4 (In Russ.). DOI: 10.20339/AM.05-17.070
  4. European Commission. Survey of schools: ICT in education. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2013. 182 p. DOI: 10.2759/94499.
  5. Livingstone S. Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education. Oxford Review of Education. 2012; 38 (1): 9—24. DOI: 10.1080/03054985.2011.577938.
  6. Yuan J., Kim C. Guidelines for facilitating the development of learning communities in online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2014; 30 (3): 220—32. DOI: 10.1111/jcal.12042.
  7. Holzmann P., Hartlieb E., Roth M. From engineer to entrepreneur Entrepreneurship education for engineering students: the case of the entrepreneurial Campus Villach. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy. 2018; 8 (3): 28—39. DOI: 10.3991/ijep.v8i3.7942.
  8. Vinogradova M., Konstantinov V., Prasolov V., Lukyanova A., Grebenkina I. Level entrepreneurship-role in the digital economy, tendencies of improvement of the information support system. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education. 2019; 22 (5). eLIBRARY ID: 43210982.
  9. Kenney M., Zysman J. Choosing a future in the platform economy: the implications and consequences of digital platforms. Kauffman Foundation New Entrepreneurial Growth Conference, Discussion Paper. Amelia Island Florida, 2015. https: //brie.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/platformeconomy2distributejune21.pdf.
  10. Rippa P., Secundo G. Digital academic entrepreneurship: the potential of digital technologies on academic entrepreneurship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2019; 146: 900—11. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.07.013.
  11. Maltceva S.M., Balashova E.S., Bogacheva A.V., Kotova A.V. The problem of formation of self-control of students in the process of studying at the university. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology. 2020; 9 (1): 24—7 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 42512724
  12. Martyshenko S.N. The influence of the internet on the communication environment of modern youth. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology. 2020; 9 1 (30): 185—9 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 42512766
  13. Sokolovskaya I.E. Digitalization as an important process of development of trainess. Human capital. 2019; 12—2 (132): 540—4 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 41881857
  14. Tatarinov K.A. Methodical aspects of the development of multimedia electronic learning courses. Azimuth of Scientific Research: Pedagogy and Psychology. 2020; 9 (1): 227—80 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 42512788
  15. Kurita K., Managi S. COVID-19 and stigma: Evolution of self-restraint behavior. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. 2020. https: //mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/107178/.
  16. Katafuchi Y., Kurita K., Managi S. COVID-19 with stigma: Theory and evidence from mobility data. Econ Disaster Clim Chang. 2020; 1—25. PMID: 32984755.
  17. Tokmakova S.I., Bondarenko O.V., Lunitsyna U.V. Experience of distance learning of dental students in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Modern problems of science and education. 2020; 3: 6 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 43079475
  18. Kudryavtseva T.V., Orekhova L.Yu., Vanchakova N.P., Tachalov V.V., Loboda E.S. The role of dentist’s instructor psychology characteristics in professional suitability for medical education. Parodontologiya. 2016; 21 (1): 30—3 (In Russ.). eLIBRARY ID: 25647071
  19. Forgasz H. Factors that encourage and inhibit computer use for secondary mathematics teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching. 2006; 25 (1): 77—93. https: //www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/6100/.
  20. Goos M. A sociocultural analysis of the development of pre-service and beginning teachers’ pedagogical identities as users of technology. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. 2005; 8: 35—59. DOI: 10.1007/s10857-005-0457-0.
  21. Thomas M.O.J. Teachers using computers in the mathematics classroom: A longitudinal study. In: proceedings 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol. 5. Prague: Charles University, 2006. Pp. 265—272.
  22. Oprea M., Miron C. Mobile phones in the modern teaching of physics. Romanian Reports in Physics. 2014; 66 (4): 1236—52. http: //www.rrp.infim.ro/2014_66_4/A30.pdf.
  23. Lazar I., Panisoara G., Panisoara I.-O. Adoption of digital storytelling tool in natural sciences and technology education by pre-service teachers using the technology acceptance model. Journal of Baltic Science Education. 2020; 19 (3): 429—53. DOI: 10.33225/jbse/20.19.429.
  24. Sappey J., Relf S. Digital technology education and its impact on traditional academic roles and practices. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice. 2010; 7 (1): 1—17. https: //ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol7/iss1/3.
  25. Echenique E.E.G, Molías L.M., Bullen M. Students in higher education: Social and academic uses of digital technology. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal. 2015; 12 (1): 25—37. DOI: 10.7238/rusc.v12i1.2078.
  26. Reich S., Simon J.F., Ruedinger D., Shortall A., Wichmann M., Frankenberger R. Evaluation of two different teaching concepts in dentistry using computer technology. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2007; 12 (3): 321—9. PMID: 16847734.
  27. Al-Dahir S., Bryant K., Kennedy K.B., Robinson D.S. Online virtual-patient cases versus traditional problem-based learning in advanced pharmacy practice experiences. Am J Pharm Educ. 2014; 78 (4): 76. PMID: 24850938.
  28. Balslev T., de Grave W.S., Muijtjens A.M.M., Scherpbier A.J.J.A. Comparison of text and video cases in a postgraduate problem-based learning format. Med Educ. 2005; 39 (11): 1086—92. PMID: 16262803.
  29. Kim J.-H., Shin J.-S. Effects of an online problem-based learning program on sexual health care competencies among oncology nurses: a pilot study. J Contin Educ Nurs. 2014; 45 (9): 393—401. PMID: 25153429.
  30. Bowdish B.E., Chauvin S.W., Kreisman N., Britt M. GTravels towards problem based learning in medical education (VPBL). Instructional Science. 2003; 31: 231—53 DOI: 10.1023/A:1024625707592.

Downloads

Received

April 1, 2021

Accepted

May 13, 2021

Published on

June 1, 2021