DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20161539

Student perceptions and learning outcome on a “fishbowl” strategy-based pharmacology seminar on drug dependence

Madhav M. Mutalik

Abstract


Background: In traditional seminars usually the participants (speakers) study a topic and the non-speakers remain passive. The present study was done by using a novel “fishbowl” strategy for conducting a pharmacology seminar.

Methods: A novel method based on “fishbowl” principle was applied to a drug dependence seminar in pharmacology, wherein every student was actively involved in the process. Learning outcome was assessed by comparing pre-test and post-test scores. Perceptions of students were assessed by a comprehensive questionnaire inquiring about the novel “fishbowl” method as well as seminars in general as a teaching-learning tool.

Results: The novel, “fishbowl” method showed a better learning outcome on a paired t test (p<0.0001) as well as positive student perceptions. The students preferred seminars rather than lectures; however, they felt that traditional seminars are beneficial only to the speakers, and that in general seminar was a difficult and time consuming task. Majority of students expressed that the seminars were useful in preparing for medical examinations, and that seminar may be a part of evaluation in MBBS examination system.

Conclusions: Use of the “fishbowl” technique produced better learning outcome through a pharmacology seminar on drug dependence. The newly designed method did involve each participant in the class, facilitated active learning, benefited to the speakers as well as non-speakers, and helped build the team spirit. “Fishbowl” principle highlights the importance of individual and small-group learning, and thus makes pharmacology learning more effective and interesting.


Keywords


Seminar, Fishbowl, Unconference, Non-speakers

Full Text:

PDF

References


Devika DM, Saleel VM, D’Mello MA, Rataboli PV. Students’ opinions on the prevailing and innovative methods in medical education technology and changes recommended. International Journal of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. 2016;5(1):121-5.

Paul C. Fish bowl. Meeting room configurations. Available at http://www.midwest-facilitators.net/downloads/meeting_room_configurations_v5.pdf Accessed 7 May 2014.

Unconference methods: fish bowl dialogue. 2006. Available at http://www.unconference.net/unconference-methods-fish-bowl-dialogue/ Accessed 26 June 2014.

Craig, Kathleen. Why unconferences are fun conferences. Business 2.0 Magazine. Available at http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/05/technology/business2_unconference0606/index.htm Accessed 21 December 2015.

Lisa M. Fishbowl: the art of active listening. Available at http://slitoolkit.ohchr.org/data/downloads/fishbowl.pdf (Accessed 26 June 2014).

Ruchi K, Pradeep B, Shende MR, Singh R. Students’ perception on seminars: a questionnaire study. South‐East Asian Journal of Medical Education. 2012;6(2):20-2.

Zuzana J, Nies Jessica AB, Albert AB. Interactive seminars or small group tutorials in preclinical medical education: results of a randomized controlled trial. BMC Medical Education. 2010;10:79.

Allen IE, Seaman CA. Likert scales and data analyses. Quality Progress. 2007;40(7):64-5.

William MK. Likert scaling. Available at www.socialresearchmethods.Net/kb/scalgutt/index.php. Accessed 24 September 2011.

Brunton PA, Morrow LA, Reddick GH, McCord JF, Wilson NH. Students' perceptions of seminar and lecture-based teaching in restorative dentistry. European Journal of Dental Education. 2000;4(3):108-11.

Robert A. The midpoint on a five-point likert-type scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1987;64:359-62.