Covid-19 Pandemi Yönetimi Uzaktan Eğitim Programının Etkililiği

Amaç: Bu çalışma, COVID-19 pandemi sürecinde intörnlere yönelik hazırlanmış uzaktan eğitim programının etkililiğini paylaşmayı amaçlamaktadır.Yöntem: Tek grup öntest/sontest deneyselçalışma düzeneğinde bir program değerlendirme çalışmasıdır. The Paired Samples T Test, Independent Sample t test, McNemar testi kullanılmıştır. Etki büyüklüğü için Cohen analizi yapılmıştır, nicel ve nitel veriler etkililik tartışması için birlikte yorumlanmıştır.Bulgular: Öğrencilerin programdan memnuniyet düzeyi 10 üzerinden 7,81,6 (medyan:8)’dur. Pretest ortalaması 16,6± 2,9 (Medyan: 17; Min-max: 3-23) iken, posttest ortalaması 20,6± 3,2 (Medyan: 21; Min-max: 10-26) ‘tır. Etki büyüklüğü Cohen’s d=1,13 olarak bulunmuştur. Program sonunda öğrencilerin Türkiye ve DSÖ’nün mücadelede başarılı olduğuna yönelik görüşlerinetleşerek artış göstermiştir (p=,000). Türkiye’de bu kadar COVID-19’un yaygınlaşmasının nedenini İslamik inancı nedeniyle S.Arabistan’ı ziyarete gidenler olarak gören öğrenci sayısında artış olmuştur (p=,000).Sonuç: Öğrencilerin bilgi düzeyleri arttıkça yeterlik algılarının da arttığı, memnuniyet oranlarının yüksek olduğu görülmüştür. Nitelikli uzaktan eğitim özelliklerine bakıldığında ve etki büyüklüğü de göz önüne alındığında programın etkili olduğu sonucuna ulaşılabilir. Bu çalışma öğrenen gereksinim duyduğunda hiçbir kurumsal zorunluluk ve başarı baskısı olmadan da etkili öğrenmenin kısıtlı koşullarda da gerçekleşebileceğinin teyidi olarak kabul edilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Tıp, Uzaktan Eğitim, COVID-19, Program, Değerlendirme

Effectiveness Of Covid-19 Pandemic Management Distance Education Program

Aim: The current research aims to share the effectiveness of the distance education program designed for interns during COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: It is a program evaluation study in a single group pretest-posttest experimental research design. The Paired Samples T-Test, Independent Sample t test, McNemar's test was used. The effect size was calculated by Cohen analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data were interpreted together for the discussion of effectiveness.Results: The level of satisfaction of students with program was 7.8±1.6 points out of 10 (median:8). The average of pretest and posttest scores respectively referred to 16,6±2,9 (Median:17; Min-max:3-23) and 20,6±3,2 (Median:21; Min-max:10-26). As a measure of effect size the value of Cohen's d was found to be 1.13. At the end of the program, the opinion of the students regarding the success of Turkey and WHO in fighting against virus became clear and showed an increase (p=,000). Also, the number of students, blaming the pilgrims who had visited Saudi Arabia for their faith for the substantial spread of COVID-19, has increased (p=,000).Conclusions: The program is effective considering the quality of its features and the size of its effect. This study can be accepted as a confirmation that effective learning can be realized in limited conditions without any success pressure when the learner needs it.

Keywords:

Medicine Education, Distance, COVID-19, Program, Evaluation,

PDF

___

1. Dong E, Du H and Gardner L . An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. The Lancet infectious diseases. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099 2020; (20)30120-1.
2. CSSE 2020. COVID-19 Dashboard by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU). Available at: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html.
3. Miller DG, Pierson L and Doernberg S. The Role of Medical Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Ann Intern Med. 2020. Available at: https://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1281
4. General Medical Council. Joint statement: earlyprovisional registration for final year medical students. Available at: https://www.gmc-uk.org/news/news-archive/early-provisional-registration-for-final-year-medical-students. 2020.
5. Arandjelovic A, Arandjelovic K, Dwyer K and Shaw C. COVID-19: Considerations For Medical Education During A Pandemic.MedEdPublish. 2020. https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2020.000087.1
6. Menon A, Klein Ej, Kollars K, Kleinhenz A. Medical Students Are Not Essential Workers: Examining Institutional Responsibility During The Covıd-19 Pandemic. Academic Medicine. 2020; 1-9. 10.1097/Acm.0000000000003478
7. Alsafi Z, Abbas AR, Hassan A, Ali MA. The Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: Adaptations in Medical Education. International Journal of Surgery 2020; 78 (2020) 64–65. Https://Doi.Org/10.1016/J.İjsu.2020.03.083
8. Republic of XXX Ministry of Health Public Health Divison. COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 Infectıon) Guideline. 2020; 11. Updated at: April 14, 2020. Available at: https://covid19bilgi.saglik.gov.tr/depo/rehberler/COVID-19_Rehberi.pdf.
9. World Health Organization. WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 – March 11, 2020. Geneva, Switzerland. Available at: https://www.who.int/dg/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19---11-march-2020.
10. Council of Higher Education. 2020. Available at: https://www.turkiye.gov.tr/yok-ebys.
11. TEPDAD (2020) COVID 19 Salgını döneminde Tıp Eğitimi ile İlgili TEPDAD Önerileri 20 Mart 2020. Available at: http://tepdad.org.tr/announcement/4.
12. Aker S, Mıdık Ö. The Views of Medical Faculty Students in Turkey Concerning the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Community Health. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-020-00841-9
13. Taha MT. Abdalla ME Wadi M and Khalafalla H. Curriculum Delivery ın Medical Education During An Emergency: A Guide on The Responses to The Covıd-19 Pandemic. MedEdPublish. 2020. DOI: 10.15694/mep.2020.000069.1.
14. Baig M, Gazzaz ZJ, Farooq M . Blended Learning: The impact of blackboard formative assessment on the final marks and students’ perception of its effectiveness. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences Online 2020; 36(3). DOI: 10.12669/pjms.36.3.1925. [Accesed 10 May 2020].
15. Kwon K, Park SJ, Shin S and Chang CY. Effects of different types of instructor comments in online discussions’. Distance Education. Taylor&Francis. 2018; 40(2): 226-242.
16. Philipsen B, Tondeur J, Roblin NP, Vanslambrouck S and Zhu C. Improving teacher Professional development for online and blended learning: A systematic meta-aggregative review. Educational Technology Research and Development. Springer. 2019; 67(5): 1145-1174.
17. Ellaway R, Masters K. AMEE Guide 32: E- Learning in Medical Education. Part 1: Learning teaching and assesment. Medical Teacher. 2008; 30(5): 455-473.
18. Kern DE, Thomas PA, Hughes MT. Curriculum Development for Medical Education. A Six-Step Approach. 2nd Edition. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2009
19. Smidt A, Balandin S, Sigafoos J, Reed VA. The Kirkpatrick model: A useful tool for evaluating training outcomes. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability. 2009; 34(3):266–27
20. Creswell, JW. Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, And Mixed Methods Approaches. London: Sage Publications, 2003 21. Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education Online. 2019; 24, 1666538: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538
22. Sandars J. Correia R, Dankbaar M, de Jong P, Goh PS, Hegel I, Masters K, Oh SY , Patel R, Premkumar K, Webb A, Pusic M. Twelve tips for rapidly migrating to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. MedEdPublish. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2020.000082.1
23. Singhal S, Hough J, Cripps D. Twelve tips for incorporating gamification into medical education. MedEdPublish. MedEdPublish. 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15694/mep.2019.000216.1
24. Deng A, Wang JJ, Tsui CH. Keeping Trainees Safe in A Pandemic: The Evolving Role of Medical Simulation Training. J Can Anesth. 2020. https://Doi.Org/10.1007/S12630-020-01662-Z