English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background:  The COVID-19 pandemic forced educators to rapidly adopt hybrid distance-learning instructions. Objective:  This study compared in-person to hybrid instructional delivery methods for acquiring biomedical sciences knowledge and critical thinking skills of first- (D1) and second-year (D2) dental students at the Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC fall trimester 2019 through fall 2020. Methods:  Participants were coded by instructional methods (in-person versus hybrid). Independent t tests were performed to compare overall biomedical course scores of two consecutive cohorts of students receiving different instructional methods. Chi-square analyses examined the relationship between letter grade distribution and instructional methods. Then, paired t tests further assessed performance of the same cohort of students between instructional methods on three subcomponent exams of course grades: multiple choice question (MCQ), computer-based objective test (COMBOT) and triple jump (T3). A survey on instructional methods was also incorporated. The study design including deidentified grades collection was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB). Results:  Students’ overall course performance in biomedical sciences in D1 and D2 was similar between the two instructional delivery methods (ρ [D1] &lt; 0.05, n = 288; ρ [D2] &lt; 0.05, n = 284). Student scores on MCQ, COMBOT and T3 exams from hybrid instructions were slightly higher than their scores from in-person instructions (ρ [MCQ], ρ [COMBOT], ρ [T3] &lt; 0.0001, n =144). Students (n = 144) preferred taking problem-based learning sessions (94%) and T3 exams (80%) via Zoom or Blackboard over in person. Conclusion:  A hybrid instructional method is effective for learning foundational biomedical knowledge and developing critical thinking skills and is preferred by dental students.

Impact of Hybrid Learning on Students’ Performance in Biomedical Sciences During COVID-19 Pandemic