Comparison of Virtual

1
Comparison of Virtual 10 Head Microscope in
Teaching Histopathology

• C Gonzalez Keelan MD, M Sante MD
• I Rivera MS, M Marcos MD, C Climent MD, A
  Gonzalez MD, M Correa MD
• Dept of Pathology Lab Med, Office of
  Evaluation Research on Med Edu, UPR School of
  Medicine

2
Background Pathology Course 123 hours
3
Basic Pathology Labs Content

• Cell injury, adaptation, death hemodynamics
• Patterns of inflammation
• Patterns of infection
• Neoplasia

4
Since 2001 10 Head Microscope

• 120 students in 14 groups
• 5 professors
• 14 professor hrs/ session 56 total
• 2-3 microscopes available
• One hour with 10 head microscope
• Assigned exercise in the schools website

5
10 head Microscope (TH)

• Pros
• Excellent resolution
• Excellent slides
• Close Professor-student relationship

• Cons
• Only 18-27 students simultaneously
• Tiresome for faculty
• Faculty consuming
• Professor directed (passive)
• Scheduling limitations

6
Virtual Microscope (VM)

• Simulates microscope with digitalized slides
• UPR MSC had acquired Bacus system, through a
  grant received at dental school
• Our slide collection sent for digitalization at
  Bacus central offices
• Research proposal to UPR IRB
• Protocol 204105 Approved

7
Purpose

• Compare student achievement when using VM vs. TH
  microscope in Basic Pathology Labs
• Determine student and faculty satisfaction in
  both teaching methods
• Determine difficulties encountered in each method

8
Hypothesis

• The students and the faculty will accept the
  virtual microscope as a superior
  teaching/learning method than the 10 head
  microscope because it is a more active learning
  method

9
Methods

• 50 students took first 2 labs with VM, 50 TH
• Student assignment to groups was almost by chance
• Students were crossed over for next 2 sessions
• Picture Quiz offered after each session
• Quiz prepared by Professor who was not teaching
  labs
• End of course satisfaction questionnaire
• Quizzes Exam photo questions analyzed

10
Method Virtual Microscope

• 60 students assigned to 2 large rooms with 1
  Professor in each room
• Students bring their own laptops
• One half hour sessions
• Students do web exercise enter the slide tray
  in VM, to answer questions

11
Ten Head Microscope

• 8-9 students 3 Professors, assigned to 7
  sessions
• Professor leads slide discussion
• One hour session
• Assigned self study web exercise
• Sometimes in the afternoon

12
Results Difficulties encountered

• VM
• 1st lab Wireless x 45 min
• 2nd lab No license
• 3rd lab Students arrived late, with few
  computers
• 4th lab Quiz offered a few days after session
• Slow connection
• 30 computer limit

• TH
• Crowded Dermatology room
• 3rd lab Mix up in cross over All TH
  Professors saw Quiz, after their 1st session

13
Results Student Satisfaction ()
Facilities
Self directed
81 students
14
Results Student Satisfaction ()
Used on my own
Quiz discussed
Time Spent
81 students
15
Results Student SatisfactionTen head

• Small groups
• Better student-teacher interaction
• Excellent image
• Well organized
• Faster
• More real

• Professor leads (?) effective use of time
• Directed, ordered teaching (?)
• Excellent explanations
• Good lecture (?)

Students write in commentaries 25
16
Results Student Satisfaction Virtual Microscope

• Liberty to study tissues at each students pace
• Portability
• Student controls search
• More discussion among peers
• More self study

• Home preview
• Accessibility
• Comfortable
• More image variety
• Fits better with Web exercises

Students write in commentaries 19
17
Results Student Satisfaction Negative

• Ten Head (10)
• Few microscopes
• Short time
• Too fast, can not see image
• Got dizzy Only professor controls image
• Can not go back later
• Uncomfortable

• Virtual (19)
• Connection
• Large groups, difficult to ask questions
• Disorganized
• Better descriptions needed
• Difficult to use, images not so good
• Unpredictable technology
• Always problems with computers internet
• Too much / All self study

18
Results Faculty Satisfaction

• Ten head
• Very good
• Except in Dermatology facilities
• 7 professor-hours/session28 total

• Virtual
• Low Faculty Student ratio
• Weak infrastructure
• Exciting to see students working together
• 3 professor-hours/session 12 total
• Easier scheduling
• Space for residents supervised teaching

19
Results Students achievement
20
Results Students achievement
21
Conclusions Difficulties with each method

• Virtual
• Infrastructure flaws
• Large student professor ratio (301)
• Disorganization after crossover
• Slow
• 30 laptop limit

• Ten head
• Inconvenient location
• Scheduling rescheduling
• Heavy on Faculty time

22
Conclusions Student satisfaction

• The student body prefers the teacher directed,
  more organized, effective, faster lecture
  oriented 10 head microscope sessions
• But, there is a significant group of students who
  were equally satisfied with Virtual (47)

23
Conclusions Faculty Satisfaction

• VM is more faculty efficient 24 vs. 56
• Both Faculty members who tried the VM are willing
  to make improvements to this method
• Faculty in Ten head sessions is uncomfortable
  with change

24
Conclusions Achievement

• No significant difference in picture questions
  of exams
• Significant difference in 3rd quiz, but quiz was
  disclosed
• When disclosed groups (2nd 3rd TH sessions were
  eliminated, no significant difference among
  methods)
• Student achievement in Quizzes deteriorated along
  the semester, independent of method
• Students achievement improved in the 5th exam

25
Conclusions Hypothesis Failed (?)

• The students did not accept the virtual
  microscope as a superior teaching/learning
  method than the 10 head microscope because they
  prefer the faster, professor directed, lecture
  method
• However, the faculty accepted the virtual
  microscope as a superior teaching/learning
  method, because it is more active

26
Future

• VM is a promising teaching tool
• Train the faculty in new technology, so that they
  wont feel menaced
• Search other faster virtual systems, that allow
  more computers at once

27
Options for optimization

• Reward students for doing web exercise before the
  10 head sessions by gaining points on basis of
  achievement
• Continue offering both experiences, including
  crossover, so that students can explore both
  learning methods