Open AccessDo Learning and Study Strategies Predict Success in Hybrid-Online Physical and Occupational Therapist Education?
Author(s) -
Evan M Pucillo,
Ellen Lowrie Black
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
the internet journal of allied health sciences and practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1540-580X
DOI - 10.46743/1540-580x/2021.2025
Subject(s) - psychology , predictive validity , predictive power , test (biology) , scale (ratio) , clinical psychology , population , anxiety , regression analysis , sample (material) , covid-19 , mental health , applied psychology , medical education , medicine , environmental health , statistics , psychiatry , paleontology , philosophy , physics , mathematics , disease , epistemology , quantum mechanics , pathology , infectious disease (medical specialty) , biology , chemistry , chromatography
Purpose: An understanding of the learning strategies most accurately predictive of success has become increasingly important as health professional education programs scale the utilization of online learning in the wake of COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to examine the predictive relationship between The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) and cumulative professional GPA (cpGPA) in hybrid-online physical (PT) and occupational therapist (OT) education. Methods: A convenience sample collected N=149 entry-level PT and OT students from three campuses across Florida, Texas, and California. A total N(%) of 89(59.7%) PT and 60(40.3%) OT students were included for analysis [48(32.2%) male; 101(67.8%) female]. A cross-sectional and predictive correlational study design was utilized. Participants self-administered the LASSI and cpGPA was collected in Spring 2020. Standard multiple linear regression analyses were conducted. Results: Neither the LASSI scales, R2 = 0.05 [F(10, 138) = 0.71, p = 0.71], nor the LASSI components, R2 = 0.01 [F(3, 145) = 0.56, p = 0.64], were able to accurately predict cpGPA. These findings contradict many prior studies in health professions education where anxiety, attitude, motivation, test strategies, and time management have been significant predictors. Conclusion: This study should be repeated due to a threat to internal validity, the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have influenced outcomes to an unknown degree. The predictive nature of this measure under more natural conditions remains unknown for this population of learners.