A Comparative Study to Evaluate the Educational Impact of E-Learning Tools on Griffith University Pharmacy Students’ Level of Understanding Using Bloom’s and SOLO Taxonomies
Table 5
Student level of understanding in semester two exams.
Variable
Control = 52
Intervention = 23
Statistic, value
Factual + procedural knowledge and remember + understand
Cytarabine 2011 versus 2012
2.2 ± 1.1
3.0 ± 1.4
= 0.02
Mitomycin C 2011 versus 2012
2.0 ± 1.1
2.4 ± 1.5
= 0.33
Trastuzumab 2011 versus 2012
2.1 ± 1.0
2.7 ± 1.3
= 0.04
Nitroimidazole 2011 versus 2012
1.9 ± 1.1
2.3 ± 1.0
= 0.23
Factual knowledge and understand + analyse
Q4 (2011) versus Q2 (2012)
2.3 ± 0.7
2.4 ± 0.8
= 0.62
Factual + procedural knowledge and understand + analyse (reference question, no e-tool)
Q8 (2011) versus (2012)
3.3 ± 1.2
2.5 ± 0.6
= 0.002
Factual + procedural knowledge and understand + analyse
Q7 (2011) versus Q6 (2012)
2.3 ± 0.7
2.7 ± 1.1
= 0.08
LAQ# (2011) versus (2012)
3.7 ± 1.3
3.7 ± 1.1
= 0.96
Total performance
2.4 ± 0.6
2.7 ± 0.7
= 0.08
This table includes statistical comparisons of mean ± SD of student level of understanding as measured by SOLO taxonomy in Human Pharmacology II course between the control and intervention groups. Scoring ranges between 2 (unistructural level) and 4 (relational level). #LAQ: long answer questions.
