Difference Between Learning Strategıes of Team-Based Learning and Case-Based Collaborative Learning Methods In Intern Physicians


Creative Commons License

Mutlu H. H., Malakcıoğlu C., ÇAKIR M., Maral I., Yıldız Inanıcı S.

Eastern Journal of Medicine, cilt.30, sa.1, ss.49-58, 2025 (Scopus, TRDizin) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 30 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.5505/ejm.2025.39269
  • Dergi Adı: Eastern Journal of Medicine
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, Academic Search Premier, CAB Abstracts, CINAHL, EMBASE, Veterinary Science Database, TR DİZİN (ULAKBİM)
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.49-58
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Active Learning, Educational Techniques, Medical Education, Teaching Methods
  • Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
  • Marmara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of resident physicians' participation in team-based learning (TBL) and case-based collaborative learning (CBCL) methods on their learning strategies and motivation. Our study is a mixed methods study in which both qualitative and quantitative data collection tools were used. Both methods were applied over a four-week period in the practices carried out on 169 intern physicians in the Public Health Internship Istanbul Medeniyet University Faculty of Medicine in the 2021-2022 academic year, and the results were evaluated using the Motivation and Learning Strategies Scale (MLSS). Frequency and percentage distributions were used to interpret the data. Correlation tests were performed to determine whether there was a relationship between the scale scores. In addition, a focus group study was conducted by interviewing the students face-to-face after the application. Our study showed that the CBCL method obtained higher scale scores than the TBL method in terms of internal goal organisation and self-efficacy (p<0.05), but no significant difference was found in terms of other sub-dimensions. Results indicated that CBCL had a slightly higher effect on students' internal goal organization and self-efficacy compared to TBL. However, both methods were similarly effective in other aspects of learning, such as peer collaboration, critical thinking, and metacognitive strategies. Focus group feedback highlighted that CBCL's realistic case approach enhanced students' motivation and practical understanding. Conversely, TBL wa s appreciated for making theoretical knowledge more engaging through clinical case tracking. Both TBL and CBCL fostered a supportive, collaborative learning environment, with CBCL having a stronger impact on motivation.