Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current Issue
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters in Response to Previous Publication
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Images
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Reviewers 2022
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Snippets
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Study Letters
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guideline-IADVL
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
Therapy Letters
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
15th National Conference of the IAOMFP, Chennai, 2006
Abstract
Abstracts from current literature
Acne in India: Guidelines for management - IAA Consensus Document
Addendum
Announcement
Art & Psychiatry
Article
Articles
Association Activities
Association Notes
Award Article
Book Review
Brief Report
Case Analysis
Case Letter
Case Letters
Case Notes
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical and Laboratory Investigations
Clinical Article
Clinical Studies
Clinical Study
Commentary
Conference Oration
Conference Summary
Continuing Medical Education
Correspondence
Corrigendum
Cosmetic Dermatology
Cosmetology
Current Best Evidence
Current Issue
Current View
Derma Quest
Dermato Surgery
Dermatopathology
Dermatosurgery Specials
Dispensing Pearl
Do you know?
Drug Dialogues
e-IJDVL
Editor Speaks
Editorial
Editorial Remarks
Editorial Report
Editorial Report - 2007
Editorial report for 2004-2005
Errata
Erratum
Focus
Fourth All India Conference Programme
From Our Book Shelf
From the Desk of Chief Editor
General
Get Set for Net
Get set for the net
Guest Article
Guest Editorial
History
How I Manage?
IADVL Announcement
IADVL Announcements
IJDVL Awards
IJDVL AWARDS 2015
IJDVL Awards 2018
IJDVL Awards 2019
IJDVL Awards 2020
IJDVL International Awards 2018
Images in Clinical Practice
In Memorium
Inaugural Address
Index
Knowledge From World Contemporaries
Leprosy Section
Letter in Response to Previous Publication
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor - Case Letter
Letter to the Editor - Letter in Response to Published Article
LETTER TO THE EDITOR - LETTERS IN RESPONSE TO PUBLISHED ARTICLES
Letter to the Editor - Observation Letter
Letter to the Editor - Study Letter
Letter to the Editor - Therapy Letter
Letter to the Editor: Articles in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters in Response to Previous Publication
Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor - Letter in Response to Previously Published Articles
Letters to the Editor: Case Letters
Letters to the Editor: Letters in Response to Previously Published Articles
Medicolegal Window
Messages
Miscellaneous Letter
Musings
Net Case
Net case report
Net Image
Net Images
Net Letter
Net Quiz
Net Study
New Preparations
News
News & Views
Obituary
Observation Letter
Observation Letters
Oration
Original Article
ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
Original Contributions
Pattern of Skin Diseases
Pearls
Pediatric Dermatology
Pediatric Rounds
Perspective
Presedential Address
Presidential Address
Presidents Remarks
Quiz
Recommendations
Regret
Report
Report of chief editor
Report of Hon : Treasurer IADVL
Report of Hon. General Secretary IADVL
Research Methdology
Research Methodology
Resident page
Resident's Page
Resident’s Page
Residents' Corner
Residents' Corner
Residents' Page
Retraction
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Reviewers 2022
Revision Corner
Self Assessment Programme
SEMINAR
Seminar: Chronic Arsenicosis in India
Seminar: HIV Infection
Short Communication
Short Communications
Short Report
Snippets
Special Article
Specialty Interface
Studies
Study Letter
Study Letters
Supplement-Photoprotection
Supplement-Psoriasis
Symposium - Contact Dermatitis
Symposium - Lasers
Symposium - Pediatric Dermatoses
Symposium - Psoriasis
Symposium - Vesicobullous Disorders
SYMPOSIUM - VITILIGO
Symposium Aesthetic Surgery
Symposium Dermatopathology
Symposium-Hair Disorders
Symposium-Nails Part I
Symposium-Nails-Part II
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis
Tables
Technology
Therapeutic Guideline-IADVL
Therapeutic Guidelines
Therapeutic Guidelines - IADVL
Therapeutics
Therapy
Therapy Letter
Therapy Letters
View Point
Viewpoint
What’s new in Dermatology
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Study Letter
89 (
6
); 897-899
doi:
10.25259/IJDVL_635_2022
pmid:

Students’ perception of self-directed learning in dermatology: A survey

Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy, Mysuru, Karnataka, India
Department of General Medicine, JSS Medical College and Hospital, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, (Deemed to be University), Mysuru, Karnataka, India

Corresponding author: Dr. Garehatty Rudrappa Kanthraj, Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprosy, JSS Medical College and Hospital, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research (Deemed to be University), Mysuru, Karnataka, India. kanthacad@yahoo.com

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Singh A, Kanthraj GR, Shastry V, Hatthur BG. Students’ perception of self-directed learning in dermatology: A survey. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2023;89:897-9.

Sir,

Learning/understanding with one’s own efforts is self-directed learning.1 There are various methods of teaching/learning in undergraduate/postgraduate education like lectures, group discussions, journal clubs, seminars, pedagogy and case presentations which incorporate components of self-directed learning in them.2 A well-planned activity with good practical implementation and evaluation are the key factors for the success of self-directed learning.3

Self-directed learning was introduced by National Medical Council into medical undergraduate (MBBS) curriculum in 2019.3 , 4 As per Competency-Based Medical Education, the National Medical Council has allotted five hours for self-directed learning in dermatology for the undergraduate curriculum.4 As it is a recently introduced modality, the advantages and disadvantages are not well understood. The importance of self-directed learning in the undergraduate curriculum has been highlighted in many studies.1 , 3 However, students’ perception of self-directed learning needs to be investigated. Two decades ago, we shared our experience in group discussion2 and journal club5 in the postgraduate curriculum. In our centre, we have recently drafted self-directed learning so as to make it a student-friendly academic exercise.

Our aim was to conduct a survey on students’ opinion with respect to content, conduct and usefulness of self-directed learning.

This survey was conducted among MBBS students of phase 3 part 1, posted in the department of dermatology at JSS Hospital, JSS Medical College, Mysuru. The self-directed learning topic chosen was “Syndromic management of sexually transmitted infections.” The process of conducting self-directed learning is illustrated in Figure 1. The time duration for the self-directed learning was divided as follows: introduction and objectives - 5 minutes, a brief discussion of clinical features of sexually transmitted infections using clinical slides (prepared by IADVL digital library) - 10 minutes and revision of algorithms on syndromic management - 10 minutes. Students were grouped into batches of 10 and were allowed to discuss in their groups. Each group were asked four to five questions related to the topic over a period of 35 minutes. Each group was assessed, following which grading was performed.

Various steps of self-directed learning
Figure 1
Various steps of self-directed learning

At the end of the session, students were asked the following three questions - (1) whether they preferred self-directed learning or lectures as the preferred mode of teaching, (2) to grade how much self-directed learning was better compared to lectures as (a) 25%, (b) 50%, (c) 75% and (d) 100% and (3) the students’ suggestions for improvement of self-directed learning curriculum.

Seventy-nine students attended self-directed learning and responded to the survey. Self-directed learning was preferred by 64 (81%) of students and the remaining 15 (19%) of them preferred lectures as a mode of learning and this difference was found to be statistically significant (X 2 = 30.392; P = 0.001) [Table 1].

Table 1 Preference of students to a mode of learning
Parameter Number of survey responses (n = 79) Number (%)
Mode of learning Self-directed learning 64 (81%)
Lectures 15 (19%)
Test statistics Chi-square = 30.392; P = 0.001
Self-directed learning rating over lectures 25% better 0 (0%)
50% better 5 (6%)
75% better 38 (48%)
100% better 36 (46%)
No difference 0 (0%)
Test statistics Chi–square = 26.00; P = 0.001

Self-directed learning was rated as 100% better than lectures by 36 (46%) students and as 75% and 50% better by 38 (48%) and 5 (6%) students respectively. None of them rated self-directed learning as only 25% better. This shows that majority of students (94%) rated self-directed learning as 75% or more better than lectures and this difference was found to be statistically significant (X 2 = 26.0; P = 0.001 [Table 1]. Total of 79 students were grouped into seven groups. Responses and their perceptions on SDL were analyzed [Table 2]. Students were assessed and graded (A+ to E) based on their discussion and answers [Table 2].

Table 2 A summary of the opinions of the students about self-directed learning
Perception of students to prefer self-directed learning Perception of students to prefer lectures Grading of students*
Quick and comprehensive learning Better comprehension A+ 2 groups
Better motivation to take part in the discussion Amount of topic covered is more A 1 group
One-to-one interaction B 3 groups
Constant concentration and attention throughout the program C 1 group
Easier to understand
Active participation by students
Better for revision
Helps in facing competitive exams
Practical application of knowledge
Students’ suggestions to improve self-directed Learning
Incorporation of multiple-choice questions
Case-based discussion can be incorporated
More visual representation
Conduction of pre- and post-test

*Grading of students (A+- 90–99%, A- 80–89%, B- 70-79%, C- 60–69%, D- 50–59%, E - <50%)

We wanted to have concise teaching techniques to be incorporated into self-directed learning. Therefore, we systematically incorporated (1) a comprehensive lecture supplemented with illustrative materials, (2) a group discussion and (3) an assessment of self-directed learning [Figure 1]. It provides a forum to achieve a frequent revision of a single topic in a single sitting. Group discussion is a core component of self-directed learning and therefore principles of group discussion hold true for self-directed learning also. Criteria for the selection of topics to be included in group discussions have been highlighted in some studies.2 Topics that are difficult to learn individually or by one’s own effort, rare disorders, topics which fail to generate interest, topics which are not regularly covered in teaching programs like seminars and case presentations, diseases that have complicated pathways that are difficult to remember unless frequent revisions are done and topics that are often neglected by students can be included in self-directed learning.

We were able to assess students in a short period of time (35 minutes). We recommend self-directed learning as a method of learning parallel to seminars for both undergraduate and postgraduate teaching. The role of the moderator, participants/students and faculty in postgraduate group discussion is highlighted.2 The moderator selects relevant literature and protocol for group discussion in advance, and illustrates with figures and flow charts in the appropriate sequence. In self-directed learning, the faculty performs the role of moderator similar to postgraduate group discussion. During the assessment, they clarify doubts and ambiguity in students’ views.

The prime reason for some students to choose traditional lectures over self-directed learning was that they felt the volume of topics covered was more. Our study is limited to just one term. In future, we would like to do it periodically and assess self-directed learning on a long-term basis.

Self-directed learning facilitates a better understanding and analysis of the topic. In our view, self-directed learning is a more effective teaching and assessment tool. Difficult-to-understand topics in a subject can be learnt better with self-directed learning. It incorporates comprehensive lectures, group discussions and assessments. All students can be assessed in the shortest time possible, unlike case presentations/seminars where only a single candidate is evaluated at a time.

Acknowledgement

Authors are thankful to Dr. Lancy D’Souza PhD, Associate Professor in Psychology, Maharaja’s College, University of Mysore, Mysore, Karnataka, India for research consultancy and statistical analysis of the data. We acknowledge JSS Academy of Higher Education & Research -JSSAHER (Deemed to be University) for their constant academic encouragement and constructive suggestions in completing this project.

Declaration of patient consent

Patient’s consent is not required as there are no patients in this study.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. , , , , , . Does medical training promote or deter self-directed learning? A longitudinal mixed-methods study. Acad Med. 2013;88:1754-64.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. . Group discussion: Prepare, learn, teach and assess. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2007;73:442-4.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , , , . Self-directed learning readiness of Indian medical students: A mixed method study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:134.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , . Competency based medical education in dermatology: Undergraduate curriculum - a cauldron of commendations, contradictions and controversies. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2022;88:282-5.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. , . Journal club: Screen, select, probe & evaluate. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2005;71:435-440.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
1,696

PDF downloads
666
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections