Abstract

Small-group, problem- based learning can require a significant amount of individual faculty time when groups last as long as 10 weeks. One solution is to use two short-term (3-5 weeks) tutors instead of a single long-term (6-10 weeks) tutor. This study was performed to evaluate whether having short-term instead of a long-term tutors affected student performance and/or the quality of the tutorial process. The grade point averages for first and second year medical students in the classes of 2001 and 2002 were stratified by how many long-term tutors students had (2, 3, 4, 5, or 6) over a period of 17 months. In addition, students completed anonymously a 24-item tutor evaluation questionnaire utilizing a 5 point Likert scale (outstanding, good, satisfactory, marginal or unsatisfactory) at the mid-point and at the end of each tutorial. The evaluations were stratified by whether the tutor was short-term or long-term (to the mid-point or end of the tutorial, respectively). Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance. Grade point averages did not correlate with the number of long-term tutors that students had. Long-term tutors were rated significantly higher than short-term tutors in 17 of the 24 categories evaluated by the questionnaire, including development of students' critical thinking, information skills and self-learning skills; encouraging students to express themselves freely and to take responsibility for their own learning; helping students to balance basic science and clinical applications; and overall assessment. Short-term vs long-term tutors do not affect objective student performance as measured by grade point average. However, long-term tutors are ranked significantly higher by students in numerous areas related to the perceived quality of the tutorial process. Short-term tutoring may be less of a demand on an individual faculty's time, but may lessen the students' perceived quality of the tutorial process.

View details for PubMedID 12913371