Download PDF
Semin Neurol 2018; 38(04): 418-427
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1667042
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Future of the Lecture in Neurology Education

Sara M. Schaefer
1   Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
,
Moises Dominguez
1   Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
,
Jeremy J. Moeller
1   Department of Neurology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
20 August 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The lecture has been a core pedagogical method since the early days of formal medical education. Although approaches to formal lectures have evolved over the years, there has been ongoing debate about the role that lectures should play in modern medical education. Arguably, traditional lectures do not align well with modern learning theory, and do not take full advantage of our current knowledge of how people learn. In many modern medical curricula, lectures have been replaced by self-study activities, including video-based lectures, computer-based learning modules, and other self-directed learning. We argue that scheduled “together time” is still important, particularly in neurology education, where there is a strong emphasis on clinical reasoning. We outline alternative teaching methods that effectively use this time, including the flipped classroom, just-in-time teaching, problem-based learning, and team-based learning. We discuss ways in which these approaches may be particularly conducive to components of neurology education.

Keywords

lectures - flipped classroom - just-in-time teaching - neurology education
 

  • References

  • 1 Mattern SP. The Prince of Medicine: Galen in the Roman Empire. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Rothstein WG. American Medical Schools and the Practice of Medicine: A History. New York: Oxford University Press; 1987
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Carr W. Professing education in a postmodern age. J Philos Educ 1997; 31 (02) 309-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Babinski J. Defence reflexes. Brain 1922; 45: 149-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Charcot JM. Lectures on the Diseases of the Nervous System. New York: Hafner Pub. Co.; 1962
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Gould GM. Editorial comment: the didactic lecture. Philadelphia Med J 1898; II (26) 1315-1317
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Hirst BC. The didactic lecture. Philadelphia Med J 1898; II (27) 1375-1376
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hare HA. Is the day of the didactic lecture a thing of the past?. Medical News 1899; 64 (07) 214
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Mettler LH. Relative merits of clinical and didactic teaching of medicine. JAMA 1899; 32 (13) 721-722
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Osler W, Bean RB, Bean WB. Sir William Osler Aphorisms, from His Bedside Teachings and Writings. New York: Schuman; 1950
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Osler W, Silverman ME, Murray TJ, Bryan CS. , American College of Physicians–American Society of Internal Medicine. The Quotable Osler. Philadelphia, PA: American College of Physicians; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Koehler P. About medicine and the arts. Charcot and French literature at the fin-de-siècle. J Hist Neurosci 2001; 10 (01) 27-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Horwitz NH. Lectures on the diseases of the nervous system. Jean Martin Charcot. Lectures on the localisation of cerebral and spinal diseases. Jean Martin Charcot. Neurosurgery 1995; 37 (05) 1022-1025
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Flexner A. Medical Education in the United States and Canada: A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Bulletin Number Four. New York City, NY: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; 1910
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Cooke M, Irby DM, O'Brien BC. Educating Physicians: A Call for Reform of Medical School and Residency. Hoboken, UNITED STATES: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated; 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Levine HG, Forman PM. A study of retention of knowledge of neurosciences information. J Med Educ 1973; 48 (09) 867-869
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Editorial WS. Problem-solving. Med Educ 1979; 13 (06) 395-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Barrows HS, Tamblyn RM. Problem-Based Learning: An Approach to Medical Education. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company; 1980
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Hafler JP. Extraordinary Learning in the Workplace. Vol 6. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Springer; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Kolb DA. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1984
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Taylor DC, Hamdy H. Adult learning theories: implications for learning and teaching in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 83. Med Teach 2013; 35 (11) e1561-e1572
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Micheel CM, Anderson IA, Lee P. , et al. Internet-based assessment of oncology health care professional learning style and optimization of materials for web-based learning: controlled trial with concealed allocation. J Med Internet Res 2017; 19 (07) e265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ojeh N, Sobers-Grannum N, Gaur U, Udupa A, Majumder MAA. Learning style preferences: a study of pre-clinical medical students in Barbados. J Adv Med Educ Prof 2017; 5 (04) 185-194
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hernández-Torrano D, Ali S, Chan CK. First year medical students' learning style preferences and their correlation with performance in different subjects within the medical course. BMC Med Educ 2017; 17 (01) 131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Toothaker R, Taliaferro D. A phenomenological study of millennial students and traditional pedagogies. J Prof Nurs 2017; 33 (05) 345-349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Roopa S, Geetha M B, Rani A, Chacko T. What type of lectures students want? A reaction evaluation of dental students. J Clin Diagn Res 2013; 7 (10) 2244-2246
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Stuart J, Rutherford RJ. Medical student concentration during lectures. Lancet 1978; 2 (8088): 514-516
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Lau KHV, Farooque P, Leydon G, Schwartz ML, Sadler RM, Moeller JJ. Using learning analytics to evaluate a video-based lecture series. Med Teach 2018; 40 (01) 91-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Jordan J, Jalali A, Clarke S, Dyne P, Spector T, Coates W. Asynchronous vs didactic education: it's too early to throw in the towel on tradition. BMC Med Educ 2013; 13: 105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Graves GO, Evans LR, Ingersoll RW, Camiscioni J. Need for a multiple-track system in medical education. J Med Educ 1969; 44 (05) 344-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lysaught JP. Individualized Instruction in Medical Education; Proceedings. Rochester, NY: Rochester Clearinghouse on Self-Instructional Materials for Health Care Facilities; 1968
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Trzebiatowski GL, Williams JH, Sachs LA, Altman M, Bellchambers M. Independent study: 10-year programme review. Med Educ 1987; 21 (06) 458-463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Johns CE, Smith RD. An independent study program in medical school. J Med Educ 1973; 48 (08) 732-738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Geertsma RH, Meyerowitz S, Salzman LF, Donovan JC. An independent study program within a medical curriculum. J Med Educ 1977; 52 (02) 123-132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Korst DR. The independent study program at the University of Wisconsin Medical School. J Med Educ 1977; 52 (05) 404-412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lau KH. Computer-based teaching module design: principles derived from learning theories. Med Educ 2014; 48 (03) 247-254
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Mehta NB, Hull AL, Young JB, Stoller JK. Just imagine: new paradigms for medical education. Acad Med 2013; 88 (10) 1418-1423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Stone HL, Meyer TC, Schilling R. Alternative medical school curriculum design: the independent study program. Med Teach 1991; 13 (02) 149-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc; 1986
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Alsharif NZ, Qi Y. A three-year study of the impact of instructor attitude, enthusiasm, and teaching style on student learning in a medicinal chemistry course. Am J Pharm Educ 2014; 78 (07) 132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Augustyniak RA, Ables AZ, Guilford P, Lujan HL, Cortright RN, DiCarlo SE. Intrinsic motivation: an overlooked component for student success. Adv Physiol Educ 2016; 40 (04) 465-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Hampton D, Pearce PF. Student engagement in online nursing courses. Nurse Educ 2016; 41 (06) 294-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Williams C, Aubin S, Harkin P, Cottrell D. A randomized, controlled, single-blind trial of teaching provided by a computer-based multimedia package versus lecture. Med Educ 2001; 35 (09) 847-854
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Lau KHV, Lakhan SE, Achike F. New media, technology and neurology education. Semin Neurol 2018; 38 (04) 457-464
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Khan S. The One World School House: Education Reimagined. New York, NY: Twelve; 2012
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Prober CG, Khan S. Medical education reimagined: a call to action. Acad Med 2013; 88 (10) 1407-1410
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Kolb DA. The Process of Experiential Learning. Experiential Learning: Experience as a The Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1984: 20-38
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Chhetri SK. E-learning in neurology education: principles, opportunities and challenges in combating neurophobia. J Clin Neurosci 2017; 44: 80-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Strowd RE, Gamaldo CE, Kwan AB, Cruz TE, Salas RM. Flipping the switch: the feasibility of a “think aloud” flipped-classroom approach to clinical reasoning instruction. J Contemp Med Educ 2016; 4 (02) 40-46
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Burns J. Critical care in the age of the duty hour regulations: circadian-based scheduling, standardized handoffs, and the flipped classroom?. Crit Care Med 2012; 40 (12) 3305-3306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Emlet LL, Al-Khafaji A, Kim YH, Venkataraman R, Rogers PL, Angus DC. Trial of shift scheduling with standardized sign-out to improve continuity of care in intensive care units. Crit Care Med 2012; 40 (12) 3129-3134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Moeller JJ, Farooque P, Leydon G, Dominguez M, Schwartz ML, Sadler RM. A video-based introductory EEG curriculum for neurology residents and other EEG learners. MedEdPORTAL 2017; 13: 10570
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Biggs J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High Educ 1996; 32 (03) 347-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Bensalem-Owen M, Chau DF, Sardam SC, Fahy BG. Education research: evaluating the use of podcasting for residents during EEG instruction: a pilot study. Neurology 2011; 77 (08) e42-e44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 London ZN, Gallagher GW, Ebright MJ. A self-study curriculum in electromyography and nerve conduction studies for residents and fellows. MedEdPORTAL 2017; 13: 10581
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Moffett J. Twelve tips for “flipping” the classroom. Med Teach 2015; 37 (04) 331-336
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Novak GM. Just-in-time teaching. New Dir Teach Learn 2011; (128) 63-73
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Marrs KA, Novak G. Just-in-time teaching in biology: creating an active learner classroom using the Internet. Cell Biol Educ 2004; 3 (01) 49-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Schuller MC, DaRosa DA, Crandall ML. Using just-in-time teaching and peer instruction in a residency program's core curriculum: enhancing satisfaction, engagement, and retention. Acad Med 2015; 90 (03) 384-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Dominguez M, DiCapua D, Leydon G. , et al. A neurology clerkship curriculum using video-based lectures and just-in-time teaching (JiTT). MedEdPORTAL 2018; 14: 10691
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Dolmans D, Michaelsen L, van Merriënboer J, van der Vleuten C. Should we choose between problem-based learning and team-based learning? No, combine the best of both worlds!. Med Teach 2015; 37 (04) 354-359
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Burgess A, Bleasel J, Haq I. , et al. Team-based learning (TBL) in the medical curriculum: better than PBL?. BMC Med Educ 2017; 17 (01) 243
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Zahid MA, Varghese R, Mohammed AM, Ayed AK. Comparison of the problem based learning-driven with the traditional didactic-lecture-based curricula. Int J Med Educ 2016; 7: 181-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Gholami M, Moghadam PK, Mohammadipoor F. , et al. Comparing the effects of problem-based learning and the traditional lecture method on critical thinking skills and metacognitive awareness in nursing students in a critical care nursing course. Nurse Educ Today 2016; 45: 16-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Loyens SM, Rikers RM, Schmidt HG. Students' conceptions of constructivist learning: a comparison between a traditional and a problem-based learning curriculum. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2006; 11 (04) 365-379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Burgess A, Ayton T, Mellis C. Implementation of team-based learning in year 1 of a PBL based medical program: a pilot study. BMC Med Educ 2016; 16 (01) 49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar