Back to Journals » Advances in Medical Education and Practice » Volume 12

Response to Letter

Comparison Between Problem-Based Learning and Lecture-Based Learning: Effect on Nursing Students’ Immediate Knowledge Retention [Response To Letter]

       

Authors Solomon Y 

Received 5 February 2021

Accepted for publication 5 February 2021

Published 16 February 2021 Volume 2021:12 Pages 163—164

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S305514

Download Article [PDF] 


Yonatan Solomon

Department of Nursing, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dire Dawa University, Dire Dawa, Ethiopia

Correspondence: Yonatan Solomon Tel +251 913820259
Email [email protected]

I am very glad to hear from you and happy to see the letter of response from the author Rahul Penumaka showing interest in the publication “Comparison Between Problem-Based Learning and Lecture-Based Learning: Effect on Nursing Students’ Immediate Knowledge Retention”


Saying this I think I need to respond to some of the points raised.

 

View the original paper by Solomon

 

This is in response to the Letter to the Editor

Dear editor

I am very glad to hear from you and happy to see the letter of response from the author Rahul Penumaka showing interest in the publication “Comparison Between Problem-Based Learning and Lecture-Based Learning: Effect on Nursing Students’ Immediate Knowledge Retention”

Saying this I think I need to respond to some of the points raised:

  1. “Notably, each group was exposed to only one teaching intervention which makes it difficult to compare student preferences. Preference may have been influenced by previous teaching experiences or a lack of familiarity with problem-based learning.”

Response: Though grouping was done for just the purpose of comparing their effect for the study objective; students have been exposed to both teaching methods starting from their 1st year, 1st semester class, so neither of the methods are new for the students.

  • 2. “Different teachers were employed for each teaching session and thus, individual teaching style and ability could have influenced student’s perceptions of each method.”

    • Response: Even though I share and appreciate your concern, individual teaching ability cannot be at a similar stage or cannot perform in a similarly equal manner. But, to minimize this, the author assigned instructors who are MSc holders and have a trainer of trainee (ToT) in PBL development, administration, facilitation and assessments of the method. So, the author believes this will minimize the problem.

  • 3. “The outcome measures of this study were immediate knowledge retention and student preference. While immediate retention is important, it is perhaps not the most relevant measure for nursing students. Instead, long-term knowledge retention and the ability to apply information may be more pertinent.”

    • Response: As you have already said, immediate knowledge retention is important; we cannot talk about long term knowledge retention without improving the immediate knowledge retention of our students. Though there is no denial on the very importance of long-term retention the author believes that we need to give attention to the student’s immediate knowledge retention, which is the ground and stepping-stone for long term knowledge retention.

  • 4. “This may not have been evident to first-year students unfamiliar with clinical practice. Students may have rated problem-based learning lower because they did not see the relevance of learning application and decision-making skills. Instead preferring a didactic teaching style which they are familiar with.”

    • Response: According to the Ethiopian nursing education curriculum, students will be exposed to clinical practice starting from the 1st year, 1st semester which means the result has not come from lack of exposure to clinical experience.

    Again, I am really happy for your interest in my published work.

    Disclosure

    The author reports no conflicts of interest in this communication.

    Creative Commons License © 2021 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

    Download Article [PDF]