Research Questions

This article focuses on cognitive flexibility theory(CFT) as a means to acquire knowledge formation in a computer based learning environment.

This study has two main research questions. The first question is "Is completing the computer program "Handling Transfusion Hazards" an effective way to learn topics in Transfusion Medicine?" and the second question is "Does completing this program in collaboration with another student enhance its effect?". Additionally the researchers wanted to find out how much time the students spent on the program and how they felt about the learning experience.

Literature Review

Since, this study bases the research on the cognitive flexibility theory, the authors referred to aspects of this theory. They refer to Whitehead (1929) who talks about the transferability of knowledge. They also refer to Feltovich, Spirro and Coulson who propose using CFT as a means to create learning environments that provide the complexity and multidimensionality of content required for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Therefore, even though the researchers do not have an extensive literature review, they managed to refer to areas that they based their research on.

Methodology

This study involved one hundred and one second year medical students. The researchers used the computer-based module "Handling Transfusion Hazards" in a series of case based instruction simulations. The researchers hypothesized that collaborative learning would enhance the CFT-based education process and they organized students to complete the module individually or in-pairs and compared test results(Using ANCOVA) for these groups.

The research employed an experimental pre-test, post-test control group design. The scores on the pre-test and post-test were based on the lab tests ordered and how the three case tests were assessed and managed.

Results

The total post-test scores were statistically significantly higher than pre-test scores. (p<.0001 by the ANCOVA) Both pairs and singles showed statistically significant(p<.0001) and very large(Cohen's d=1.25 singles, d=1.44 for pairs) pre-post test score gains, but the score gains of pairs and singles were not statistically significantly different from each other.(p=.943 for the pairs/singles ANCOVA).

The researchers also collected some qualitative data regarding students comments(based on surveys). The students thought negatively regarding the time required of them and the program as an instructional method. However, they thought positively about the opportunity and benefits of collaborative learning.

Conclusions

According to the authors, even though the real-life setting required some compromises in research design, it's still showed that "Handling Transfusion Hazards" is another CFT based experience that promotes learning. Additionally, the authors think that the participants might have been accustomed to memorizing and reproducing information and may not have been prepared to deeply analyze and synthesize the information.

Since the authors believe that an active, student-centered learning environment is necessary, I think additional qualitative data(such as interviews) would provide rich insight into why the students would prefer to work in a certain way.(For instance, with partners of choice)