Volume : 1, Issue : 1, NOV 2015

ASSESSMENT OF DENTAL ANATOMY CARVING FOR UNDERGRADUATES IN COMPUTER-ASSISTED LEARNING VS. CONVENTIONAL LEARNING METHOD

Dr. RanaAl-Haj Hussain, Dr. med. dent. Aous Dannan

Abstract

Aim: Computer-assisted learning (CAL)has the potential to supplement faculty instruction, especially when there is a need for repeated demonstration
of technique. The aim of this study was to test the superiority of CAL over traditional laboratory instruction in the area of dental anatomy
wax carving for undergraduates.
Methods: Eighty undergraduate students from the first year at the Faculty of Dentistry / Syrian Private University (SPU) were subjected to 2
lectures with two different methods (conventional learning vs. CAL) explaining wax carving of upper and lower right canines. All students were
asked to carve an upper and a lower right canine using the dental wax block. Clinical supervisors evaluated the student's work using a scale from
0 to 5. Independent T-Test as well as paired sample T-Test were used to compare 2 samples evaluated for both conventional and computerassisted
methods.
Results: There were significant differences in evaluation records of upper canine carving between conventional and CAL methods, and those differences
were more adhered to the CAL. No significant differences in evaluation records of lower canine carving between conventional and CAL
methods were found. Combined together, no significant differences in evaluation records of both upper and lower canines' carving between conventional
and CAL methods were found.
Conclusion: CAL showed no significant superiority over conventional learning in terms of wax carving course for undergraduates. However,
CAL could be successfully used as a complement to the traditional educational systems in preclinical course of tooth anatomy wax carving.

Keywords

Article : Download PDF

Cite This Article

Article No : 2

Number of Downloads : 376

References

1. Atkinson RC. Computerized instruction and the learning process.
American psychologist. 1968;23(4):225.
2. Suppes P, Morningstar M. Computer-assisted instruction. Science.
1969;166(3903):343-50.
3. Rosenberg H, Grad HA, Matear DW. The effectiveness of computer-
aided, self-instructional programs in dental education: a
systematic review of the literature. Journal of dental education.
2003;67(5):524-32.
4. Buchanan JA. Use of simulation technology in dental education.Journal of Dental Education. 2001;65(11):1225-31.
5. Wheeler RC. Dental anatomy, physiology, and occlusion: WB
Saunders Company; 1974.
6. Haj-Ali R, Walker MP, Petrie CS, Steven J. Educational necessities
to compensate for faculty shortage. Journal of dental education.
2007;71(4):511-5.
7. McCann AL, Schneiderman ED, Hinton RJ. E-teaching and learning
preferences of dental and dental hygiene students. Journal of
dental education. 2010;74(1):65-78.
8. Browne L, Mehra S, Rattan R, Thomas G. Comparing lecture and
e-learning as pedagogies for new and experienced professionals in
dentistry. British dental journal. 2004;197(2):95-7.
9. Stern DT, Mangrulkar RS, Gruppen LD, Lang AL, Grum CM,
Judge RD. Using a multimedia tool to improve cardiac
auscultation knowledge and skills. Journal of general internal
medicine. 2001;16(11):763-9.
10. Larbuisson R, Pendeville P, Nyssen A-S, Janssens M, Mayné A.
Use of Anaesthesia Simulator: initial impressions of its use in two
Belgian University Centers. Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica.
1999;50(2).
11. Weiss MB, Berg CR, Probst CO. Programmed self instruction of
dental techniques: a pilot study. Journal of dental education.
1971;35(7):455.
12. Altman DG, Bland JM. Statistics notes: Absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence. Bmj. 1995;311(7003):485.
13. Bogacki RE, Best A, Abbey LM. Equivalence study of a dental
anatomy computer-assisted learning program. Journal of dental
education. 2004;68(8):867-71.
14. Fayaz A, Mazahery A, Hosseinzadeh M, Yazdanpanah S. Videobased
Learning Versus Traditional Method for Preclinical Course
of Complete Denture Fabrication. Journal of Dentistry, Shiraz
University of Medical Sciences. 2015;16:21-8.