|
|||||||
|
Effectiveness of the Jigsaw Method in Learning Anatomy among Phase I Medical Students: A Quasi-experimental Study |
|||||||
|
D Sreelekha, KV Sarala Devi, Rajeev Panwar 1. Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, Sri Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Anatomy, ESIC Medical College and Hospital, KK Nagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, ESIC Medical College and Hospital, KK Nagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu |
|||||||
|
Correspondence Address : D Sreelekha, No. 2/724C, 2nd Main Road, Kazura Garden, Neelankarai, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. E-mail: sreedorai@gmail.com |
|||||||
|
|||||||
| ABSTRACT |  | ||||||
: Introduction: The Didactic method of instruction has traditionally been the primary approach in Indian medical education. Over the past decade, there has been a notable transition in undergraduate medical education from pedagogy to heutagogy, emphasising attitude, ethics and communication. The Jigsaw method represents a relatively novel and innovative learning technique wherein the students are divided into parent groups, which are further divided into smaller subgroups. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Jigsaw method in comparison to the traditional Didactic approach in teaching Anatomy to first professional (Phase I) MBBS students. Materials and Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in the Department of Anatomy at Employees’ State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) Medical College and Hospital, KK Nagar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, from December 2024 to May 2025, on a study population of 152 Phase I MBBS students. The students were divided into two groups: Batch 1 engaged in the Jigsaw method, while Batch 2 participated in the Didactic method for the same specified topic. All the students underwent a Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ) based pretest and post-test before and after the teaching learning sessions, respectively. Additionally, feedback was collected from all participants using a Likert scale after the session. To know the difference in performance between pre- and post-test scores of each method, a paired t-test was used. Results: The mean difference (mean±SD) of pretest and post-test of the Jigsaw and the Didactic methods was calculated. The p-value arrived at was <0.001 for the Jigsaw method and 0.049 for the Didactic method. Further, the post-test scores of both methods were compared using the Independent t-test to understand the effectiveness of the methods. The p-value was less than 0.001, which was significant. The feedback scores were analysed using an Independent t-test. The mean±SD for the Jigsaw method was 25.98±4.17 and the Didactic method was 24.77±1.10. The p-value was 0.038, which showed a significant difference in the scores, with a higher score for the Jigsaw method. Conclusion: Students who participated in the Jigsaw method demonstrated improved post-test results, indicating enhanced retention and understanding of concepts compared to those who underwent the Didactic lecture methodology. | |||||||
|
|
|||||||
| Keywords : Innovative teaching, Interactive teaching, Jigsaw cooperative learning, Traditional teaching | |||||||
|
|
|||||||
| DOI and Others : Innovative teaching, Interactive teaching, Jigsaw cooperative learning, Traditional teaching | |||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
|
|
|||||||
Original article / research
|
Full Version