Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles
PowerPoint presentations (PPTs) have become routine in medical colleges because of their flexible and varied presentation capabilities. Research indicates that students prefer PPTs over the chalk-and-talk method, and there is a lot of debate over advantages and disadvantages of PPTs. However, there...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Advances in physiology education 2015-12, Vol.39 (4), p.367-371 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 371 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 367 |
| container_title | Advances in physiology education |
| container_volume | 39 |
| creator | Ankad, Roopa B Shashikala, G. V Herur, Anita Manjula, R Chinagudi, Surekharani Patil, Shailaja |
| description | PowerPoint presentations (PPTs) have become routine in medical colleges because of their flexible and varied presentation capabilities. Research indicates that students prefer PPTs over the chalk-and-talk method, and there is a lot of debate over advantages and disadvantages of PPTs. However, there is no clear evidence that PPTs improve student learning/performance. Furthermore, there are a variety of learning styles with sex differences in classrooms. It is the responsibility of teacher/facilitator and student to be aware of learning style preferences to improve learning. The present study asked the following research question: do PPTs equally affect the learning of students with different learning styles in a mixed sex classroom? After we assessed students' predominant learning style according to the sensory modality that one most prefers to use when learning, a test was conducted before and after a PPT to assess student performance. The results were analyzed using Student's t-test and ANOVA with a Bonferroni post hoc test. A z-test showed no sex differences in preferred learning styles. There was significant increase in posttest performance compared with that of the pretest in all types of learners of both sexes. There was also a nonsignificant relationship among sex, learning style, and performance after the PPT. A PPT is equally effective for students with different learning style preferences and supports mixed sex classrooms. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1152/advan.00119.2015 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1738819278</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1084634</ericid><sourcerecordid>3889199051</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-373ee0487da8672ccb1b7faa4ba4e7055093e0b78077db6f881292651706e32c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkE1P3DAQQC1UVCjtvZdWkbhwyTL-iO0cKz7aopVYiXK2nGSyGGXtrZ2A8u9rWKASJ1v2e6PRI-QrhQWlFTu13YP1CwBK6wUDWu2Rw_zMSspY_SHfQfBSgJAH5FNK9wCghOYfyQGTkmkp6SExq_CIcRucH4tVxIR-tKMLvnC-WKKN3vl1sbqbkwtDWM9FMxe3vsO4jrab7IipeHTjXXHu-h5jlv9LN-M8YPpM9ns7JPzych6R28uLP2e_yuX1z99nP5ZlKyQdS644IgitOqulYm3b0Eb11orGClRQVVBzhEZpUKprZK81ZTWTFVUgkbOWH5GT3dxtDH8nTKPZuNTiMFiPYUqGKp6dmimd0eN36H2Yos_bZUpIXeuqrjIFO6qNIaWIvdlGt7FxNhTMU3zzHN88xzdP8bPy_WXw1GywexNea2fg2w7A6Nq374srClpILvg_LiWKFA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1746898595</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Physiological Society Paid</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ankad, Roopa B ; Shashikala, G. V ; Herur, Anita ; Manjula, R ; Chinagudi, Surekharani ; Patil, Shailaja</creator><creatorcontrib>Ankad, Roopa B ; Shashikala, G. V ; Herur, Anita ; Manjula, R ; Chinagudi, Surekharani ; Patil, Shailaja</creatorcontrib><description>PowerPoint presentations (PPTs) have become routine in medical colleges because of their flexible and varied presentation capabilities. Research indicates that students prefer PPTs over the chalk-and-talk method, and there is a lot of debate over advantages and disadvantages of PPTs. However, there is no clear evidence that PPTs improve student learning/performance. Furthermore, there are a variety of learning styles with sex differences in classrooms. It is the responsibility of teacher/facilitator and student to be aware of learning style preferences to improve learning. The present study asked the following research question: do PPTs equally affect the learning of students with different learning styles in a mixed sex classroom? After we assessed students' predominant learning style according to the sensory modality that one most prefers to use when learning, a test was conducted before and after a PPT to assess student performance. The results were analyzed using Student's t-test and ANOVA with a Bonferroni post hoc test. A z-test showed no sex differences in preferred learning styles. There was significant increase in posttest performance compared with that of the pretest in all types of learners of both sexes. There was also a nonsignificant relationship among sex, learning style, and performance after the PPT. A PPT is equally effective for students with different learning style preferences and supports mixed sex classrooms.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1043-4046</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-1229</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1152/advan.00119.2015</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26628661</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Physiological Society</publisher><subject>Academic Achievement ; Audiovisual Aids ; Auditory Perception ; Cognitive Style ; Comparative Analysis ; Comprehension ; Computer Software ; Curriculum ; Education, Professional - methods ; Educational Measurement ; Educational Status ; Female ; Foreign Countries ; Gender Differences ; Health education ; Humans ; India ; Instructional Improvement ; Learning ; Learning Modalities ; Male ; Medical Students ; Medicine ; Physiology ; Physiology - education ; Preferences ; Pretests Posttests ; Reading ; Science Achievement ; Science Instruction ; Sex Factors ; Student Improvement ; Students ; Students, Health Occupations - psychology ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Teaching - methods ; Undergraduate Students ; Variance analysis ; Visual Aids ; Visual Perception ; Writing</subject><ispartof>Advances in physiology education, 2015-12, Vol.39 (4), p.367-371</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2015 The American Physiological Society.</rights><rights>Copyright American Physiological Society Dec 1, 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-373ee0487da8672ccb1b7faa4ba4e7055093e0b78077db6f881292651706e32c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-373ee0487da8672ccb1b7faa4ba4e7055093e0b78077db6f881292651706e32c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3039,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1084634$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26628661$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ankad, Roopa B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shashikala, G. V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herur, Anita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manjula, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chinagudi, Surekharani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patil, Shailaja</creatorcontrib><title>Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles</title><title>Advances in physiology education</title><addtitle>Adv Physiol Educ</addtitle><description>PowerPoint presentations (PPTs) have become routine in medical colleges because of their flexible and varied presentation capabilities. Research indicates that students prefer PPTs over the chalk-and-talk method, and there is a lot of debate over advantages and disadvantages of PPTs. However, there is no clear evidence that PPTs improve student learning/performance. Furthermore, there are a variety of learning styles with sex differences in classrooms. It is the responsibility of teacher/facilitator and student to be aware of learning style preferences to improve learning. The present study asked the following research question: do PPTs equally affect the learning of students with different learning styles in a mixed sex classroom? After we assessed students' predominant learning style according to the sensory modality that one most prefers to use when learning, a test was conducted before and after a PPT to assess student performance. The results were analyzed using Student's t-test and ANOVA with a Bonferroni post hoc test. A z-test showed no sex differences in preferred learning styles. There was significant increase in posttest performance compared with that of the pretest in all types of learners of both sexes. There was also a nonsignificant relationship among sex, learning style, and performance after the PPT. A PPT is equally effective for students with different learning style preferences and supports mixed sex classrooms.</description><subject>Academic Achievement</subject><subject>Audiovisual Aids</subject><subject>Auditory Perception</subject><subject>Cognitive Style</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Comprehension</subject><subject>Computer Software</subject><subject>Curriculum</subject><subject>Education, Professional - methods</subject><subject>Educational Measurement</subject><subject>Educational Status</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Gender Differences</subject><subject>Health education</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>India</subject><subject>Instructional Improvement</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning Modalities</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Students</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Physiology</subject><subject>Physiology - education</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>Pretests Posttests</subject><subject>Reading</subject><subject>Science Achievement</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>Student Improvement</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Students, Health Occupations - psychology</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Teaching - methods</subject><subject>Undergraduate Students</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><subject>Visual Aids</subject><subject>Visual Perception</subject><subject>Writing</subject><issn>1043-4046</issn><issn>1522-1229</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkE1P3DAQQC1UVCjtvZdWkbhwyTL-iO0cKz7aopVYiXK2nGSyGGXtrZ2A8u9rWKASJ1v2e6PRI-QrhQWlFTu13YP1CwBK6wUDWu2Rw_zMSspY_SHfQfBSgJAH5FNK9wCghOYfyQGTkmkp6SExq_CIcRucH4tVxIR-tKMLvnC-WKKN3vl1sbqbkwtDWM9FMxe3vsO4jrab7IipeHTjXXHu-h5jlv9LN-M8YPpM9ns7JPzych6R28uLP2e_yuX1z99nP5ZlKyQdS644IgitOqulYm3b0Eb11orGClRQVVBzhEZpUKprZK81ZTWTFVUgkbOWH5GT3dxtDH8nTKPZuNTiMFiPYUqGKp6dmimd0eN36H2Yos_bZUpIXeuqrjIFO6qNIaWIvdlGt7FxNhTMU3zzHN88xzdP8bPy_WXw1GywexNea2fg2w7A6Nq374srClpILvg_LiWKFA</recordid><startdate>20151201</startdate><enddate>20151201</enddate><creator>Ankad, Roopa B</creator><creator>Shashikala, G. V</creator><creator>Herur, Anita</creator><creator>Manjula, R</creator><creator>Chinagudi, Surekharani</creator><creator>Patil, Shailaja</creator><general>American Physiological Society</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151201</creationdate><title>Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles</title><author>Ankad, Roopa B ; Shashikala, G. V ; Herur, Anita ; Manjula, R ; Chinagudi, Surekharani ; Patil, Shailaja</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c461t-373ee0487da8672ccb1b7faa4ba4e7055093e0b78077db6f881292651706e32c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Academic Achievement</topic><topic>Audiovisual Aids</topic><topic>Auditory Perception</topic><topic>Cognitive Style</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Comprehension</topic><topic>Computer Software</topic><topic>Curriculum</topic><topic>Education, Professional - methods</topic><topic>Educational Measurement</topic><topic>Educational Status</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Gender Differences</topic><topic>Health education</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>India</topic><topic>Instructional Improvement</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning Modalities</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Students</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Physiology</topic><topic>Physiology - education</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>Pretests Posttests</topic><topic>Reading</topic><topic>Science Achievement</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>Student Improvement</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Students, Health Occupations - psychology</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Teaching - methods</topic><topic>Undergraduate Students</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><topic>Visual Aids</topic><topic>Visual Perception</topic><topic>Writing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ankad, Roopa B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shashikala, G. V</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Herur, Anita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manjula, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chinagudi, Surekharani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Patil, Shailaja</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Advances in physiology education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ankad, Roopa B</au><au>Shashikala, G. V</au><au>Herur, Anita</au><au>Manjula, R</au><au>Chinagudi, Surekharani</au><au>Patil, Shailaja</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1084634</ericid><atitle>Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles</atitle><jtitle>Advances in physiology education</jtitle><addtitle>Adv Physiol Educ</addtitle><date>2015-12-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>39</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>367</spage><epage>371</epage><pages>367-371</pages><issn>1043-4046</issn><eissn>1522-1229</eissn><abstract>PowerPoint presentations (PPTs) have become routine in medical colleges because of their flexible and varied presentation capabilities. Research indicates that students prefer PPTs over the chalk-and-talk method, and there is a lot of debate over advantages and disadvantages of PPTs. However, there is no clear evidence that PPTs improve student learning/performance. Furthermore, there are a variety of learning styles with sex differences in classrooms. It is the responsibility of teacher/facilitator and student to be aware of learning style preferences to improve learning. The present study asked the following research question: do PPTs equally affect the learning of students with different learning styles in a mixed sex classroom? After we assessed students' predominant learning style according to the sensory modality that one most prefers to use when learning, a test was conducted before and after a PPT to assess student performance. The results were analyzed using Student's t-test and ANOVA with a Bonferroni post hoc test. A z-test showed no sex differences in preferred learning styles. There was significant increase in posttest performance compared with that of the pretest in all types of learners of both sexes. There was also a nonsignificant relationship among sex, learning style, and performance after the PPT. A PPT is equally effective for students with different learning style preferences and supports mixed sex classrooms.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Physiological Society</pub><pmid>26628661</pmid><doi>10.1152/advan.00119.2015</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1043-4046 |
| ispartof | Advances in physiology education, 2015-12, Vol.39 (4), p.367-371 |
| issn | 1043-4046 1522-1229 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1738819278 |
| source | MEDLINE; American Physiological Society Paid; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Academic Achievement Audiovisual Aids Auditory Perception Cognitive Style Comparative Analysis Comprehension Computer Software Curriculum Education, Professional - methods Educational Measurement Educational Status Female Foreign Countries Gender Differences Health education Humans India Instructional Improvement Learning Learning Modalities Male Medical Students Medicine Physiology Physiology - education Preferences Pretests Posttests Reading Science Achievement Science Instruction Sex Factors Student Improvement Students Students, Health Occupations - psychology Surveys and Questionnaires Teaching - methods Undergraduate Students Variance analysis Visual Aids Visual Perception Writing |
| title | Powerpoint Presentation in Learning Physiology by Undergraduates with Different Learning Styles |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T20%3A20%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Powerpoint%20Presentation%20in%20Learning%20Physiology%20by%20Undergraduates%20with%20Different%20Learning%20Styles&rft.jtitle=Advances%20in%20physiology%20education&rft.au=Ankad,%20Roopa%20B&rft.date=2015-12-01&rft.volume=39&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=367&rft.epage=371&rft.pages=367-371&rft.issn=1043-4046&rft.eissn=1522-1229&rft_id=info:doi/10.1152/advan.00119.2015&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3889199051%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1746898595&rft_id=info:pmid/26628661&rft_ericid=EJ1084634&rfr_iscdi=true |