Exploring Student Attitudes to Directed Self-Learning Online through ...

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 129] Journal of Veterinary

Individual Course Support

Exploring Student Attitudes to Directed Self-Learning Online through Evaluation of an Internet-Based Biomolecular Sciences Resource Vicki H.M. Dale Lubna Nasir Martin Sullivan g

g

ABSTRACT Rationale for the study – In 2000, funding was awarded by the University of Glasgow’s Learning and Teaching Development Fund (L&TDF) for the authors to develop an interactive, online learning resource for veterinary biomolecular sciences teaching. This course is a core component of the veterinary undergraduate curriculum at the university. Evaluations were carried out to gauge students’ experiences of using the resource as a basis for exploring students’ attitudes toward online, independent learning. Methodology – Peers were asked to review the design and content of four modules, also evaluated by students using questionnaires and focus group discussions. Additionally, students were observed using the modules. Both first-year students and second-year direct-entry students (i.e., students entering the veterinary program with advanced training) participated in the evaluation, which allowed for some comparison between the groups. One cohort used the modules independently, and their responses were compared with the cohorts that used the modules in scheduled classes. Results and conclusions – The evaluations indicate that this is a useful resource that could act as a template for other courses within the veterinary undergraduate curriculum, particularly for learning of basic sciences. On average, first-year and timetabled students rated the program more highly overall, rated the program more highly in relation to previous instruction, and rated tutor presence as more important than second-year direct-entry and independent students did. The lower rating given to tutor presence by second-year direct-entry and independent students indicates that they are more confident using the modules without tutor supervision. The modules are available online at .

INTRODUCTION The University of Glasgow’s Faculty of Veterinary Medicine has been at the forefront of many innovations. Recent educational developments in the Bachelor of Veterinary Medicine and Surgery (BVMS) program have been documented.1 One recent development was the inclusion of a new two-year veterinary biomolecular sciences (VBS) core course in the 2000/2001 session. Teaching methods include lectures, small-group tutorials, self-directed learning classes, and practical classes. Students’ knowledge is formally examined at the end of each term, with a class examination in December and March in both years, and a professional examination in June of the second year. Each examination includes a multiple-choice component in addition to essay and short answer questions. Computer-aided learning (CAL) was gradually introduced into the course over a two-year period. Students used the CAL modules, available online, in supervised classes as well as accessing them during independent study. A previous study2 showed that within a supportive learning environment, students learned as effectively using CAL as they did by attending didactic lectures, although students were generally reluctant to dispense with lectures. Nevertheless, the biomolecular sciences modules were developed to be comprehensive learning JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

resources with a view toward lecture replacement in the longer term. The development, implementation, and evaluation strategies of this project have been briefly described elsewhere.3

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES Our main aim was to develop a series of CAL modules that, once implemented, would give first- and second-year veterinary students a basic understanding of molecular biology in relation to animal health. Our subsequent aim was to evaluate the modules to assess their educational benefit, to see if this would serve as a useful model for other areas of the undergraduate veterinary course. The anticipated main objectives, our outcomes, were to create a flexible resource that would .

give the first- and second-year students a comparable level of knowledge and understanding of molecular biology and its application to veterinary problems by the time the students went into third year.

.

serve as a lecture replacement, permitting more efficient use of staff teaching time.

.

offer students an independent, directed self-learning resource for learning and revision. 129

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 130] Journal of Veterinary

MATERIALS AND METHODS Development of the Modules

Module topics – The module topics were based on discussion with members of the VBS teaching staff. Storyboards were developed by the second author, in consultation with other members of the VBS teaching staff, as well as with academic staff involved in other life sciences undergraduate courses at the university. The following four modules were developed: 1. Eukaryotic gene structure: Transcription and translation— Fundamental basics in molecular biology and the processes by which RNA is synthesized from DNA and subsequently translated into an amino acid sequence. 2. Introduction to single gene disorders—Differing modes of inheritance of genetic disorders, with examples of specific genetic diseases in veterinary species. 3. Introduction to chromosomal disorders—The concept of karyotype analysis and how chromosomal disorders can be detected, and the different types of chromosomal disorders, illustrated with examples.

Because the modules were aimed at first- and second-year students, an easy-to-use, aesthetic, ‘‘contained’’ resource was developed that provided links to relevant Web sites but did not rely on these for crucial content.

Formative student assessment – Within each module, a selftest was included for students to take after working through the material. It was hoped that students would use the feedback in order to revisit the tutorial material and re-take the test, hopefully obtaining a better score the second time around. The style and presentation of the questions within the selftest were designed to emulate those encountered by students in multiple-choice exams. It was anticipated that this would prepare them for real examinations. Each self-test is based entirely on the material presented within the module. The feedback screen includes ’’Sections to revise [review],’’ prompting students to refer back to the instructional material and encouraging student reflection. Evaluation

4. Hormones: An introduction to molecular endocrinology— Different molecular pathways by which hormones exert their biological effects, illustrated with commonly occurring veterinary endocrine disorders.

Peer review – Peers from the teaching and teaching support staff and colleagues with expertise in instructional design were consulted about the look and feel of the modules, the instructional design, and the content. Responses were positive, and suggestions were incorporated into the development. These included comments about the text size on screen and the nature of the quiz feedback.

Design – The first author, as Educational Technologist, made suggestions as to how the storyboards might be developed to include more interactions and animations so that the CAL packages would engage the students and facilitate effective learning.

Student questionnaires – Evaluation conducted over a period of time was thought to be beneficial, to allow time for the modules to be formally integrated into the course and to monitor any differences or similarities between the cohorts. The groups of students who were selected to participate are shown in Table 1.

A proportion of the project’s funding was spent on graphic design. The university’s Graphic Designer designed the visually pleasing interface and the three-dimensional objects used in the animations.

The original questionnaire asked the students .

if they had Internet access at home.

.

if they had used CAL before.

Table 1: Questionnaire administration Date

Module

Mode of Study

Student Year

# of Forms

# of Students

Response Rate

2001/2002 September

1

Timetabled

2 (direct entries)

6

6

100%

December

1

Timetabled

1

74

94

78.7%

April

4

Timetabled

2

70

98

71.4%

December

1

Timetabled

1

77

104

74.0%

January

1

Timetabled

2 (direct entries)

5

6

83.3%

Timetabled but facilitators not present

1

44

104

42.3%

Independent study

2

66

98

67.3%

3

3

100%

86

105

81.9%

2002/2003

March May

2, 3 4

2003/2004 September

1–4

Timetabled

2 (direct entries)

December

1

Timetabled

1

130

JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 131] Journal of Veterinary

.

how the tutorial (module) compared with previous types of instruction.

.

how important tutor presence was.

.

the perceived importance of e-mail and bulletin board correspondence with tutor(s).

.

whether they looked at the recommended Web sites.

.

how much the animations aided understanding.

.

how interactive the program was.

.

their perceived level of computer literacy.

.

whether it was obvious what they had to ‘‘do’’ on each screen.

.

to rate the ease of navigation.

.

to suggest improvements.

From April 2002 onward, students were also asked to rate the program on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. Students in the independent study cohort in May 2003 were also asked to state where they had used the module(s) (i.e., on campus or at home). The majority of questions used five-point Likert scales (ordinal data); questions were also asked that required a nominal response (e.g., yes/no). The results were interpreted using the SPSS statistical software package.a

Student focus groups – During the 2002/2003 session, the authors met with students in two focus groups. The first meeting, in February 2003, involved discussion of the modules with six second-year direct-entry students. The second meeting was with three first-year students in March 2003. During both meetings, coordinated by the authors, the computer screen showing the modules was projected using an LCD projector as a focus for discussion. Individual consent to use data from the focus group was obtained via audio recording on minidisk at the start of each discussion. Observation of students – In all supervised CAL classes apart from March 2003, two or three demonstrators were present to offer assistance to students where necessary. Further evaluation data were obtained by observing the students during supervised classes and discussing any problems encountered.

RESULTS Between December 2001 and December 2003, 431 questionnaires were collected from students. The dates, mode of study, student year, and response rate are shown in Table 1. Responses to Likert-scale questions from all the cohorts were averaged; the mean, median, and quartiles are shown in Table 2. A Mann-Whitney U test was also conducted, comparing first- and second-year students’ responses, and separately comparing mode of study (independent versus timetabled). The Mann-Whitney test allows comparison of the means of two independent samples. Responses to yes/no/don’t know (nominal) questions and the results of the cross-tabulation analyses are shown in Table 3. JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

Responses from the independent study cohort in May 2003 revealed that 46.4% of respondents used the modules in the computer center on campus, while 43.5% used them in halls of residence and 10.1% used them at home.

DISCUSSION Overall Impression The questionnaire data indicate that students rated the modules highly, with a mean value of 4.02 on a scale of 1 (negative) to 5 (positive), with 3 representing a neutral response. An inter-quartile range of zero (between the 25th and 75th quartiles) reflects no variation in student responses to this question. Comments on the evaluation forms backed this up: Felt it was very good for revision [reviewing] and the graphics made information from the lecture a lot clearer. Clear and understandable. Very easy to follow. Found it very clear and helpful. Taken through step by step, systematically. User-friendly. The focus group discussions covered a diverse range of topics and included students comments about CAL generally, rather than one specific package, but it was suggested that similar modules would aid understanding in other firstyear pre-clinical subjects: Tutor: Do you think this serves as a useful model, like for the other courses? Do you think anatomy or animal husbandry could benefit from a similar interface? Student 1: Yes, definitely. Student 2: Yeah. Student 1: Especially physiology because I think that’s the one we all struggle with. Student 2: Yeah. Student 3: Mm-hm. Student 2: I have already done a course in biochemistry, a lot of this is just looking back over [it] again but it would be really helpful in the courses where I’m just . . . it’s all brand new to me, so . . . The Mann-Whitney test showed a significant difference between the year groups in their rating of the module. There was also a significant difference between the ratings given by students studying independently and those studying in timetabled classes. Students in timetabled classes, on average, rated the program higher than those who used the modules independently. First-year students, on average, rated the modules significantly higher than second-year direct-entry students. However, in terms of the individual mean values, these differences are small. Independent Study

Prior use of CAL – On average, 78.3% of students had used CAL before, indicating that the majority were familiar with this teaching method. There was a significant difference 131

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

132

Table 2: Responses to the Likert-scale questions (1Vlow, 5Vhigh)y

Overall impression How would you rate this CAL program?

Mean

4.02

25th

Quartiles 50th (Median)

75th

Grouping Variable

Individual Means

Mann-Whitney U Test: Two-Tailed Probability (p )

4.00

4.00

4.00

Student year

1

4.10

0.016*

2

3.92

I

3.77

T

4.08

1

3.85

2

3.56

Mode of study

I

3.41

< 0.001***

Student year

T 1

3.80 2.55

< 0.001***

2

2.10

Mode of study

I

1.66

< 0.001***

Student year

T 1

2.52 3.27

0.581

2

3.34

I

3.42

T

3.27

Mode of study Independent study How does this tutorial compare with any previous instruction on this topic?

How important is it for the tutor(s) to be present while you are using CAL? JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

How important do you think it would be to correspond with tutor(s) using e-mail and/or bulletin boards?

3.76

2.54

3.33

3.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

3.00

4.00

Student year

Mode of study

0.002**

< 0.001***

0.656

[Page No. 132] Journal of Veterinary

Question

How interactive was the tutorial?

4.35

3.72

4.00

3.00

5.00

4.00

5.00

4.00

Student year

1

4.25

2

4.36

Mode of study

I

4.34

0.363

Student year

T 1

4.28 3.63

0.957

2

3.70

I

3.58

T

3.68

1

3.70

2

3.69

I

3.86

T

3.65

1

4.31

2

4.23

I

4.19

T

4.30

1

4.54

2

4.62

I

4.56

T

4.58

Mode of study

0.851

0.156

Ease of use How computer-literate would you rate yourself to be?

3.67

3.00

4.00

4.00

Student Year

How obvious was it what you had to ‘‘do’’ on each screen?

4.31

4.00

5.00

5.00

Student Year

Mode of study

How easy was it to navigate?

4.59

4.00

5.00

5.00

Student Year

Mode of study

0.897

0.094

0.297

0.127

0.633

0.775

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001 (statistical significance). y The mean and quartiles are shown, as well as the results of the Mann-Whitney U test for two independent samples, based on year group (1 or 2) and mode of study (independent or timetabled). The significant p values were multiplied by 2 because two tests were performed on each set of data (the Bonferroni correction).

[Page No. 133] Journal of Veterinary

Mode of study

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

Engaging the student How do the animations enhance the tutorial/help your understanding?

133

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 134] Journal of Veterinary

Table 3: Responses to yes/no/don’t know (nominal) questions* Question

Responses (%) Yes No

Don’t know

Grouping Variable

X2

Level of Significance

0.667

NS

0.001

p < 0.01

0.578

NS

0.109

NS

0.507

NS

0.473

NS

Independent study Do you have internet access at home?

83.1

16.9

Student year

1 2

Have you used CAL before?

Did you look at the suggested Web sites on the ’’Links’’ screen?

78.3

18.5

3.3

Overall

72.3

24.1

3.6

Student year

92.6

4.9

2.5

31.8

65.5

2.7

1 2

Student year

1 2

Mode of study

I T

Did you look at other Web sites linked to the suggested Web sites?

4.3

93.5

2.2

Student year

1 2

Mode of study

I T

*

For analyses that generated non-significant results, the proportions of responses in each category have been amalgamated. For significant results, the proportion of responses is shown for years 1 and 2.

between first- and second-year students regarding previous use of CAL, with a higher proportion of second-year directentry students than first-year students having used CAL. This is an expected result, as some second-year cohorts would have used the first-year CAL modules for this subject, while direct-entry students are likely to have used CAL in their previous degree course.

Comparison of the modules with other forms of instruction – When students were asked to compare the module(s) they used with previous forms of instruction on the same topic, a mean value of 3.76 shows that generally the CAL compared favorably with other forms of instruction, also demonstrated by the inter-quartile range of 3 to 4. The Mann-Whitney test showed a significant difference between the year groups, and between the different study modes, in students’ comparison of CAL to previous instruction. The first-year students, on average, rated the program higher in relation to previous instruction than second-year students; timetabled students rated it higher in relation to previous instruction than independent learners. As before, these differences were small but were found to be significant. In the second-year focus group, some students indicated that other traditional teaching could easily be replaced by CAL: Student 1: There was one practical we had . . . and it just—we were there for over two hours and all we did was pipette a few things, you know, if you got to do that, and that was it really. And if that had been on a CAL package it would have taken half an hour, be a lot less expensive, it was such a waste of time. 134

Student 2: It was completely needless for us as vet students to go in and simply pipette, you know, twelve things, when like you say, if it was on a CAL thing . . .

Importance of tutor presence – Student observations would suggest that the presence of the tutor(s) was not generally important because once the students were able to access the CAL modules, the majority had no problems using them. Little input was required from the demonstrators. This conclusion is further supported by the questionnaire data, which reveal a mean value of 2.54 and an inter-quartile range of 2 to 3. Varying viewpoints from students are demonstrated by comments on the evaluation forms: [It] is good to know you can ask if you are unsure about something. Good to have a person there if you have a question. Program is very self-explanatory. They [tutors] weren’t needed. The Mann-Whitney test showed a significant difference between the year groups, and between the different study modes, in students’ attitudes to the presence of tutor(s). The first-year students rated tutor presence as more important than the second-year students, indicating perhaps that firstyear students were more reliant on guidance from tutors than more mature students. The timetabled learners rated tutor presence as more important than the independent learners, perhaps indicating that the students in timetabled classes felt they had benefited from being able to talk to tutors about the topics covered by the CAL modules while JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 135] Journal of Veterinary

independent learners were content to get on with the task at hand.

Anticipated value of e-mail and bulletin board correspondence – A mean value of 3.33 and an inter-quartile range of 3 to 4 indicate that some of the respondents would appreciate the advantages of using e-mail and/or bulletin boards to correspond with their tutors while the remainder were neutral. Comments on the questionnaires illustrate this range of responses: Questions often arise when studying, not in class. From experience, I find bulletin board discussions very useful—[you] benefit from others’ questions. It would be helpful to be able to ask questions on specific areas when the tutor wasn’t available (e.g., once all those lectures were over). [I] don’t think it is an effective way of learning. [I] don’t contact tutors. The Mann-Whitney test revealed no significant difference between the year groups, or between the different study modes, in students’ attitudes to e-mail and bulletin board use.

Home Internet access – The questionnaire results show that, of all respondents, an average of 83.1% had Internet access at home, while 82.6% of the most recent first-year student intake had home access. This is encouraging and suggests that the majority of students have the necessary computer equipment to study independently. Given the current trend toward e-learning in veterinary education,4 it is likely that in the coming years all students will be required to have Internet-ready computers at home. There was no significant difference between first- and second-year direct-entry students in terms of home Internet access, which is surprising: one might expect that a larger proportion of mature students, having spent some time working professionally, would have Internet access at home. This result may reflect the fact that the majority of first-year students, whatever the expense, feel the need to be properly equipped for distance education. In the independent study cohort of May 2003, 53.6% of respondents used the modules at home or in halls of residence, while the remaining 46.4% used the computers in the campus computer center. One could conclude from this that a large proportion of students benefit from interactions with other students while studying ‘‘independently,’’ or it may simply be that using the campus computers is convenient, despite a high proportion of students having home Internet access.

Motivation to study independently – Although students were asked to use the modules independently, the low questionnaire response rate from this cohort (67.3%) indicated that many students are not motivated to study independently. An even lower response rate was recorded for the cohort of students who were timetabled but not supervised. Students’ lack of motivation to study is also demonstrated by their responses to questions on Web site access. When asked whether they had accessed the recommended Web sites, an average of 31.8% said they had, showing that about two-thirds of the students did not look at these sites. JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

Few students explored the Web further: only 4.3% reported looking at Web sites linked from the recommended sites. There was no significant difference between first- and second-year students in this regard, nor between independent and timetabled learners. One reason for this could be a lack of available class time, as a handful of students noted on their evaluation forms that they would probably access the links later from home. This was exemplified in the first-year focus group discussion: I think the people who are interested in the links . . . like I wrote them down and then I took them home and looked at them, instead of just doing it while in the computer cluster, so I think they are helpful to have on there, even if a lot of people don’t use them while they’re in the computer cluster right after the tutorial. However, it seems more likely that students are unwilling to explore the subjects in greater detail themselves. This could lead to problems in trying to implement directed selflearning on a larger scale, caused by students’ lack of confidence in their ability to look information up themselves. Or perhaps few students explored the Web further because the undergraduate VBS course is so informationintensive that students must be selective with regard to the information they acquire and assimilate. Staff and student resistance to independent learning has been noted elsewhere,5 although the idea of increasing independent learning in place of lectures has been advocated for some time.6 Engaging the Student

Visual learning with animations – The degree to which Webbased animations support accessible independent learning has been described by Guttmann.7 In the present study, a mean value of 4.35 and an interquartile range of 4 to 5 indicate that the animations were considered very helpful by both first- and second-year students. This opinion was voiced by individuals in the first-year focus group discussions: Student 1: I personally am a more visual learner . . . Student 2: Yeah. Student 1: . . . so I like little videos like that, I mean I think those are helpful. I actually for— was it physiology—we were learning about, you know, just muscles, and I found a little video on another school’s Web site that was very helpful, it helped me understand some things. So I like little videos like that. Student 1: I think that helps to reinforce what you learn in class too because in class you don’t really see this going on, you just hear what the lecturer’s . . . they’re just doing a sequence of events and then you see this animation and it just puts everything together. Student 3: Yeah, because you can get the stages written down in just about any textbook but I think to see it actually does help to put it in your mind. 135

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 136] Journal of Veterinary

The second-year focus group yielded similar comments: I think this lends itself well to the subject because you can’t actually see it, so like the animation things, you can see that, and I think that’s very, very important, more so than, say, anatomy . . . The comments on the evaluation forms also demonstrate this point: Animations helped understanding of written theory. The Mann-Whitney test revealed no significant difference between the year groups, or between the different study modes, in students’ rating of the degree to which animations assisted their learning.

Interactivity – When students were asked about the degree of interactivity of the modules, a mean value of 3.72 and an inter-quartile range of 3 to 4 show that most students were either neutral toward the level of interactivity or gave a positive response. The Mann-Whitney test revealed no significant difference between the year groups, or between the different study modes, in the degree of interactivity perceived by the students. Ease of Use

IT literacy – The students were, on the whole, fairly confident of their IT literacy skills, with a mean value of 3.67. An interquartile range of 3 to 4 shows that students were generally comfortable with their degree of IT literacy but that there were few respondents who considered themselves to be very computer literate. The Mann-Whitney test revealed a significant, albeit small, difference between the two modes of study in terms of students’ responses to their perceived level of computer literacy. The independent learners rated themselves more computer literate than the timetabled students, perhaps having developed more confidence in their abilities through having accessed the modules on their own. Confidence in using CAL – A mean value of 4.31 and an interquartile range of 4 to 5 show that the majority of students were clear about what they were required to do on each screen. A mean value of 4.59 and an inter-quartile range of 4 to 5 reveal that the students had no difficulty in navigating through the material. The Mann-Whitney test revealed no significant difference between the year groups, or between the different study modes, in terms of students’ views on how easy the modules were to use and navigate. Improvements – Students were asked to suggest improvements to the modules on the evaluation forms and in the focus groups. Their suggestions included .

more self-test questions

.

more animations and visuals

.

a print facility for notes

.

more detailed information

.

more modules for other course topics

What students learn, and how they learn, is strongly influenced by assessment.8 This explains the requests for more self-test questions. Animations and visuals were obviously considered useful by the majority of students. 136

The implication is that more animations would aid understanding further for those students who learn visually. A print facility for notes could easily be created, and the authors will consider this for the proportion of students who prefer handouts of factual, more detailed information to interacting with the material through quizzes and animations. Course tutors will be approached in other pre-clinical subject areas to determine if similar Internet-based modules could be created for those subject areas.

CONCLUSIONS The aim of this project was to develop a series of CAL modules to complement the didactic component of the Veterinary Biomolecular Sciences course at Glasgow and to implement and evaluate these with a view to eventually replacing the lectures with the modules and small group tutorials. In general, the package was well received by students and staff; was positively rated by most students; and was considered clear and easy to use. The package also compared well with instruction that the students had previously experienced in the same topics. The majority of students had used CAL before and so were familiar with this teaching method. The animations were considered very helpful, and more of these were requested, along with more self-test questions, a print facility for notes, and more modules in other subject areas. The fact that a large proportion of students did not look at the suggested Web sites indicates either a general reluctance to explore the topics in further detail or a lack of confidence on the students’ part in their ability to learn independently. Unfamiliarity with the use of e-mail and bulletin boards to facilitate electronic communication with tutors led to there being little call for their use in the course at the present time. However, students and instructors will be encouraged to use integrated discussion tools in the near future, as the university is now centrally supporting a virtual learning environment.b

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the following for their tremendous help with the project: the University of Glasgow Learning and Teaching Development Fund (LTDF); the university’s Teaching and Learning Service; Professor David Eckersall and Dr. Jim Morrison, collaborators on the project who helped drive it forward and peer-reviewed the content of the CAL modules; Dr. Peter Birch, for sharing his expertise in developing online learning materials for teaching biochemistry; Dr. Erica McAteer, Ms. Helen Chappel, and Mrs. Gill McConnell for providing formative feedback on instructional design; and Ms. Jo Grant for her excellent graphic design skills. We especially thank Dr. Giles Innocent, who read through the paper and checked the statistics for us, advising corrections where appropriate; and all the students who used the CAL modules and who gave up what little free time they had between classes to participate in the evaluations.

NOTES a

SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL . The questionnaire design has implications for the types of JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

[23.3.2005–12:18am] [129–137] L:/Inprocess/UTPress/JVME/JVME32(1)-Revises-2/JVME-020.3d

[Page No. 137] Journal of Veterinary

statistical tests that can be performed on the data, conducted in this study using SPSS. This package is a useful tool as statistical output can be easily grouped by different between-group variables: year of study (1 or 2) or mode of study (independent or timetabled). This allows us to easily compare the first- and second-year student responses and the responses from students using different study modes. b

Moodle .

REFERENCES 1 Dale VHM, Johnston PEJ, Sullivan M. Learning and teaching innovations in the veterinary undergraduate curriculum at Glasgow. J Vet Med Educ 30:221–225, 2003. 2 Dale VHM, Sullivan M, Irvine DR. Computer-assisted learning as an alternative to didactic lectures: A study of teaching the physics of diagnostic imaging. Assoc Learn Tech J 7(3):75–86, 1999. 3 Nasir L, Dale VHM. Quantitative versus qualitative approaches to understanding veterinary students’ experiences of online learning using a biomolecular sciences example. Res Vet Sci 74(Suppl. A):17, 2003. 4 Short N. The use of information and communication technology in veterinary education. Res Vet Sci 72(1):1–6, 2002.

JVME 32(1) ß 2005 AAVMC

5 Herron MA, Wolf A, DiBrito W. Faculty and student attitudes toward problem solving and independent learning in the veterinary medical curriculum. J Vet Med Educ 17:19–21, 1990. 6 Armistead WW. Blueprint for a modern veterinary college. J Am Vet Med Assoc 156:1580–1582, 1970. 7 Guttmann GD. Animating functional anatomy for the Web. Anat Rec 261:57–63, 2000. 8 Weeks BR, Herron MA, Whitney MS. Preclinical curricular alternatives: Method for evaluating student performance in the context of clinical proficiency. J Vet Med Educ 20:9–13, 1993.

AUTHOR INFORMATION Vicki H.M. Dale, BSc, MSc, ILTM, is an Educational Technologist at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G61 1QH UK. E-mail: [email protected]. Lubna Nasir, BSc (Hons), MSc, PhD, ILTM, is a Lecturer in Veterinary Biomolecular Sciences at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G61 1QH UK. Martin Sullivan, BVMS, PhD, DVR, Dipl. ECVDI, ILTM, MRCVS, is Associate Dean for Teaching and Learning at the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G61 1QH UK.

137