Most important task for any teaching professional is to impart meticulous knowledge to learners. As far as medical education is concerned, it is vital to use best available expertise in teaching methodology [1]. Understanding the concepts taught in basic science subjects serves as a backbone for studying the clinical sciences [2].

Second professional year in the medical undergraduate is the pedestal where the students start attending clinics. Theoretical teaching will be of great help to make their fundamentals clear. Variation in the teaching methods is necessary as per the need. Medical Council of India has made arrangement of training of medical faculties by organizing medical educational units in all medical colleges.

Regular sessions are being conducted all over the country by the medical education units [1]. In most of the medical colleges of India, the knowledge regarding basic science subjects is taught mainly through didactic lectures, practical’s, and hence the system is more of teacher centred with less interaction or involvement from the students [3].

Lecture is considered the most cost-effective method in comparison with other teaching learning methods. However, attention span studies have shown that students’ attention decreases significantly after 20 min in traditional lectures. Introducing interactivity in the lecture breaks the monotony and stimulates interest resulting in improved attention.

Lecture imparts a great deal of information quickly and effectively to a large number of students. Tutorials, seminars and other student centered learning have been used to Complement lectures which are viewed as interactive components. However, in recent years, efforts are taken to make the lecture more effective by using various interactive methods.

There is a need to explore innovations in planning lectures so as to sustain interest. This can be achieved by implementation of student-centred programs like role plays, seminars, tutorials, quiz competitions, group discussions, integrated teaching and Cinemeducation. Interactive teaching is very important for medical students where the retention and recall of information is needed for its application in clinical practice.

Perceptions of the students were elicited regarding these sessions using a questionnaire based on Likert scale, which was validated in a pilot study. Validation of the scale indicated good internal consistency with Crohnbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.9. Results were illustrated using bar charts and pie charts.

Ethical consideration: The study protocol has been approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee for ethical approval.

Method of collection of data: The data was collected using an anonymous pre-designed questionnaire. Discussions were carried out with the head of the department and other faculty members regarding the project and their valuable inputs were taken in preparation of questionnaire. A series of interactive methods such as small group discussions, Cinemeducation, integrated teaching, multiple choice questions (MCQ’s), question answer sessions, seminars, Quiz, and summaries were introduced in the pathology curriculum for 153 medical students of 2nd year M.B.B.S at appropriate intervals. And during formative assessment sessions “Playing Card type” - Viva-voce examination was undertaken. In which there were 20 questions. These questions were divided into Must to know, desirable to know and nice to know. Must to know questions accounted for 14 questions, desirable to know accounted for 4 questions and nice to know questions accounted for 2 questions. Playing Cards were made for each question. Student should pick 7 cards from a bunch of 14 cards of must to know, 2 cards from desirable to know and one card from nice to know. Whole viva-voce was given 10 marks.

There were four quiz competitions. First was general pathology, second was haematology, third was systemic pathology and last quiz was a Grand quiz and participants who won previous quiz’s were choosen.

Questionnaire

Feedback Form

Date:

Please answer the following by ticking in the appropriate box.

A= Strongly Agree, B= Agree, C= can’t say, D=Disagree and E=Strongly Disagree

The MCQs were liked by most of the students, followed by jig-saw learning and cross-word puzzle [Table 2]. The students felt that interactivity improved their communication skills, added to the retention of the knowledge, improved the attention span during the lecture and hence recommended its use for all other lectures [Table 3]. Only few students noted that it is time consuming and syllabus will not get completed. For traditional lectures, students felt that they are monotonous, continuous and difficult to concentrate beyond 20-30 min. They felt that interactivity keeps them active and more attentive in the class, makes the atmosphere lively and hence results in better understanding of the subject, more retention of the facts and also helps in clearing doubts. The students were satisfied and happy with this new method of learning and suggested that other lectures should also be conducted in a similar manner.

Fig 1: Likert scale for enjoying the interactive lecture

Fig 2: Comparison of appreciation of different types of interactivities

Category 1: MCQ (86%) Category 2: Cross-word puzzle (71%) Category 3: Jigsaw learning (84%)

Yellow colour: Strongly agree

Green Colour: Cannot say

Red Colour: Agree

Dark Blue Colour: Disagree

Sky blue Colour: Strongly disagree

It encourages and expects learners to participate. It values student’s prior ideas and aims at empowering students to be independent learners.

The vision of a teacher using an interactive approach is to develop classrooms, where students are helped to make sense and reflect on their experiences, evaluate their work and set future learning goals. In such classrooms students are encouraged to articulate how they learn, they should be able to express what the problem is they working on, what questions and prior ideas they have what their plans are to solve the problem [2,3].

Interactive teaching is the term given to a strategy/style of teaching. For teachers it offers an opportunity to learn along with the students and to use their interactive skills to listen carefully and challenge misconceptions where possible. The teacher's own knowledge will always be an important factor. There are likely as many teaching methods and techniques as there are teachers, but some stand out due to their effectiveness. Both teachers and students will enjoy class more when it includes methods that encourage students to take responsibility for their own learning and a more active role in and out of the classroom [2,3].

A number of interactive teachings and assessment methods were undertaken for theory and practical’s sessions. Practical’s sessions were conducted by making small groups (9 students/group) and allowing case based group discussions, crossword puzzles, think-pair-share, one minute paper and Playing Card - Viva-voce. In theory classes’ cinemeducation, integrated teaching, seminars, Quiz, brain storming, confusion technique, question answer sessions, think-pair-share and multiple choice questions (MCQ’s) were introduced in the pathology curriculum. In study done by Buch et al students liked MCQs the most followed by brain storming and confusion technique, where as in our study students liked the MCQs the most followed by jig-saw learning and cross-word puzzle [4].

MCQs in between the lectures break the monotony and activate students’ interaction. It is less time consuming, Pre-PG entrance exam oriented and also can act as a problem solving tool. Brainstorming act as a problem based learning, activates the students to think and activate decision making ability. It can make a very good start of the lecture and make it interesting. Confusion technique at the end helps to clear doubts.

MCQ’s and Cinemeducation were the most liked interactive sessions. So, we want to conclude by saying that a “Teacher should take a new role of a Facilitator” for facilitating the process of interactive learning rather than delivering elaborative lectures.

Dr. Mahesh Kumar U and Dr. Pankaj Pande both conceived and planned the experiments. Miss. Prasanna carried out the experiments. Miss. Prasanna contributed to sample preparation. Dr. Mahesh Kumar U, Dr. Pankaj Pande and Miss Prasanna contributed to the interpretation of the results. Dr. Mahesh Kumar U and Dr. Pankaj Pande took the lead in writing the manuscript. All the authors provided critical feedback and helped shape the research, analysis and manuscript.

Dr. Anandam. G, Prof & HOD Pathology, Dr. Sharadrutha Prasad, Prof. Pathology, Dr. Srikanth S, Prof Pathology, All Post graduate students and technical staff of PIMS, Karimnagar for their help and co-operation.