Compétences en littératie visuelle chez les étudiantEs en biologie au niveau collégial: bilan des apprentissages selon des activités digitales ou des activités de dessins à la main

This study examines the role of visual literacy in learning biology. Biology teachers promote the use of digital images as a learning tool for two reasons: because biology is the most visual of the sciences, and the use of imagery is becoming increasingly important with the advent of bioinformatics; and because studies indicate that this current generation of teenagers have a cognitive structure that is formed through exposure to digital media. On the other hand, there is concern that students are not being exposed enough to the traditional methods of processing biological information - thought to encourage left-brain sequential thinking patterns. Theories of Embodied Cognition point to the importance of hand-drawing for proper assimilation of knowledge, and theories of Multiple Intelligences suggest that some students may learn more easily using traditional pedagogical tools. To test the claim that digital learning tools enhance the acquisition of visual literacy in this generation of biology students, a learning intervention was carried out with 33 students enrolled in an introductory college biology course. The study compared learning outcomes following two types of learning tools. One learning tool was a traditional drawing activity, and the other was an interactive digital activity carried out on a computer. The sample was divided into two random groups, and a crossover design was implemented with two separate interventions. In the first intervention students learned how to draw and label a cell. Group 1 learned the material by computer and Group 2 learned the material by hand-drawing. In the second intervention, students learned how to draw the phases of mitosis, and the two groups were inverted. After each learning activity, students were given a quiz on the material they had learned. Students were also asked to self-evaluate their performance on each quiz, in an attempt to measure their level of metacognition. At the end of the study, they were asked to fill out a questionnaire that was used to measure the level of task engagement the students felt towards the two types of learning activities. In this study, following the first testing phase, the students who learned the material by drawing had a significantly higher average grade on the associated quiz compared to that of those who learned the material by computer. The difference was lost with the second “cross-over” trial. There was no correlation for either group between the grade the students thought they had earned through self-evaluation, and the grade that they received. In terms of different measures of task engagement, there were no significant differences between the two groups. One finding from the study showed a positive correlation between grade and self-reported time spent playing video games, and a negative correlation between grade and self-reported interest in drawing. This study provides little evidence to support claims that the use of digital tools enhances learning, but does provide evidence to support claims that drawing by hand is beneficial for learning biological images. However, the small sample size, limited number and type of learning tasks, and the indirect means of measuring levels of metacognition and task engagement restrict generalisation of these conclusions. Nevertheless, this study indicates that teachers should not use digital learning tools to the exclusion of traditional drawing activities: further studies on the effectiveness of these tools are warranted. Students in this study commented that the computer tool seemed more accurate and detailed - even though the two learning tools carried identical information. Thus there was a mismatch between the perception of the usefulness of computers as a learning tool and the reality, which again points to the need for an objective assessment of their usefulness. Students should be given the opportunity to try out a variety of traditional and digital learning tools in order to address their different learning preferences.

The Impact of a Simulated Clinical Experience on CEGEP Nursing Students’ Perceptions of Self-Efficacy and Achievement

Abstract : Providing high-quality clinical experiences to prepare students for the complexities of the current health-care system has become a challenge for nurse educators. Additionally, there are concerns that the current model of clinical practice is suboptimal. Consequently, nursing programs have explored the partial replacement of traditional in-hospital clinical experiences with a simulated clinical experience. Despite research demonstrating numerous benefits to students following participation in simulation activities, insufficient research conducted within Québec exists to convince the governing bodies (Ordre des infirmières et des infirmiers du Québec, OIIQ; Ministère de L’Éducation supérieur, de la Recherche, de la Science et de la Technologie) to fully embrace simulation as part of nurse training. The purpose of this study was to examine the use of a simulated clinical experience (SCE) as a viable, partial pedagogical substitute for traditional clinical experience by examining the effects of a SCE on CEGEP nursing students’ perceptions of self-efficacy (confidence), and their ability to achieve course objectives. The findings will contribute new information to the current body of research in simulation. The specific case of obstetrical practice was examined. Based on two sections of the Nursing III-Health and Illness (180-30K-AB) course, the sample was comprised of 65 students (thirty-one students from section 0001 and thirty-four students from section 0002) whose mean age was 24.8 years. With two sections of the course available, the opportunity for comparison was possible. A triangulation mixed method design was used. An adapted version of Ravert’s (2004) Nursing Skills for Evaluation tool was utilized to collect data regarding students’ perceptions of confidence related to the nursing skills required for care of mothers and their newborns. Students’ performance and achievement of course objectives was measured through an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) consisting of three marked stations designed to test the theoretical and clinical aspects of course content. The OSCE was administered at the end of the semester following completion of the traditional clinical experience. Students’ qualitative comments on the post -test survey, along with journal entries served to support the quantitative scale evaluation. Two of the twelve days (15 hours) allocated for obstetrical clinical experience were replaced by a SCE (17%) over the course of the semester. Students participated in various simulation activities developed to address a range of cognitive, psychomotor and critical thinking skills. Scenarios incorporating the use of human patient simulators, and designed using the Jeffries Framework (2005), exposed students to the care of families and infants during the perinatal period to both reflect and build upon class and course content in achievement of course objectives and program competencies. Active participation in all simulation activities exposed students to Bandura’s four main sources of experience (mastery experiences, vicarious experiences, social persuasion, and physiologic/emotional responses) to enhance the development of students’ self-efficacy. Results of the pre-test and post-test summative scores revealed a statistically significant increase in student confidence in performing skills related to maternal and newborn care (p < .0001) following participation in the SCE. Confidence pre-test and post-test scores were not affected by the students’ section. Skills related to the care of the post-partum mother following vaginal or Caesarean section delivery showed the greatest change in confidence ratings. OSCE results showed a mean total class score (both sections) of 57.4 (70.0 %) with normal distribution. Mean scores were 56.5 (68.9%) for section 0001 and 58.3 (71.1%) for section 0002. Total scores were similar between sections (p =0.342) based on pairwise comparison. Analysis of OSCE scores as compared to students’ final course grade revealed similar distributions. Finally, qualitative analysis identified how students’ perceived the SCE. Students cited gains in knowledge, development of psychomotor skills and improved clinical judgement following participation in simulation activities. These were attributed to the « hands on » practice obtained from working in small groups, a safe and authentic learning environment and one in which students could make mistakes and correct errors as having the greatest impact on learning through simulation.