Negotiating the MAze: Case based collaborative distance learning in dentistry

• Main Author: S K Lechner
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Taylor & Francis Group 2001-06-01
• Series: Medical Education Online
• Subjects: medical education; health professional education; peer-reviewed; Clinical science education; Informatics/Web; dental education; collaborative learning; oral rehabilitation; computer aided learning
• Online Access: http://www.med-ed-online.org/t0000019.htm

The module was developed as an elective to give motivated senior dental students an opportunity to expand their horizons in planning oral rehabilitation. It comprised one tutor and 12 students, from five universities world-wide, communicating on the World Wide Web (WWW), to develop oral rehabilitation plans for simulated patients. Trigger material came from one of two Case Profiles and consisted of diagnostic casts and details of the clinical and radiographic examination in WWW/CD-ROM form. No background material was supplied as to the "patients" age, sex, history or main concern(s). Students worked in groups of three, each student from a different location. Individual students were given a role within the group: "Patient", who developed a "personal background" belonging to the trigger examination material, "Academic" who identified state-of-the-art treatment options available for the dental treatment needs identified by the group and "General Practitioner" who tailored these options to the "patients" needs and wants. Student feedback focused on their perception of their experience with the program in response to a questionnaire comprising 11 structured and four "open" questions. All students felt that the program increased their confidence in planning oral rehabilitation. Ten students felt that the "best thing about the program" was the interaction with students from other universities and the exposure to different philosophies from the different schools. Eight students mentioned their increased awareness of the importance of patient input into holistic planning. Under the heading "What was the worst thing", students cited some technical hitches and the snowball effect of two sluggish students who were not identified early enough and thus impacted negatively on the working of their groups. Student feedback showed that the module succeeded in its aims but needed modification to improve the logistics of working with an extended campus.