8. Overall Conclusions

8.3 Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes have been assessed using several measures - pre and post test content questions, self assessed levels of confidence and student views and responses to several questions on questionnaires and in discussion groups. In most cases these levels of confidence, pre and post test scores and student responses have all indicated the same positive trends. Students have recorded an increase in confidence, their scores have shown a significant increase in learning and responses have indicated that students feel themselves to have benefited from the teaching episode. This effectiveness is evident in most cases studies, regardless of the teaching methods used.

Two case studies stand out as showing a different view, namely the two studies where students were asked to do the package in their own time. In one of these case studies, where first year students studied the Guinea Pig Ileum package, results showed very little increase in confidence and very little increase in learning. Comments were critical of the approach and the timing of the teaching episode. In the second study, where second year students did the Problem Solving in Community Practice package, increased levels of confidence were recorded, comments were generally favourable but students appeared to have deteriorated rather than improved their scores after the teaching episode. This may be just an unexplainable anomaly, but another factor singles these two case studies out from the rest. In time-tabled sessions, there were generally only one or two people absent from any group and the tutor was able to ensure that students undertook the required task(s). In the two studies mentioned here, very few from each group were shown to have completed the task as required. For the group studying Guinea Pig Ileum - 25% and the group studying Problem Solving - 39%. This in itself is a good indicator of how much less effective this approach to using CAL packages with students appears to be. Furthermore, it has been shown that in asking students to work on the material in their own time, the responsibility for ensuring the accessibility and viability of the technology is transferred to the student and the inevitable problems that will arise with this increase the likelihood of students failing to complete the task.

One further issue should be mentioned here. Students expressed anxiety and a lack of motivation if the teaching and learning context was not clear to them. The more scene setting and guidance students had at the beginning, the more confident they felt. In her book "Rethinking University Teaching", Diana Laurillard lists five pieces of information students need to get the most out of a learning session - Why the topic is important and interesting, how it relates to other topics on their course, what they should already know, the learning objectives and how to approach the learning session (Laurillard, 1993, p212). This information is mostly included in the packages themselves but is not context specific and should not replace the integration required of the tutor to ensure that the material is directly relevant to the specific teaching and learning situation. In addition then, it is suggested that information such as the following be included - Why they are using CAL for this topic, why it is introduced at this point in the course, the objectives of this learning session, which sections (activities) are essential/not required. In addition to this, the anxiety expressed by a large number of students, in several studies, about the amount of time available also shows that students cannot usually assess this for themselves and again need some very specific guidelines on how much time each section as well as the overall package is likely to take. The information contained in this report on the time students have spent on the package could provide a basis for such guidance on the three specific packages in the future.