Table 3
Female versus male medical students’ responses to CBL14
| Question | Females (n = 75) | Males (n = 79) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean* | (SE) | Mean* | (SE) | |
| Students answered on a 5 point scale: very large extent (1); large extent (2); moderate extent (3); small extent (4); not at all (5). | ||||
| Eight of the questions measured the student’s own response to the initial discussion sessions, and four measured how each student rated the group’s achievements: females versus males (Student’s t test). | ||||
| **p<0.05; ***p<0.001; ****p<0.001. | ||||
| 1. Sessions had clear direction and purpose | 2.25 | (0.098) | 2.96 | (0.104)**** |
| 2. “Seven jump” method found helpful | 2.99 | (0.116) | 3.49 | (0.109)*** |
| 3. I participated in the discussions by my group | 2.04 | (0.101) | 2.39 | (0.094)** |
| 4. I improved my skills in recognising points in the history | 2.61 | (0.098) | 3.06 | (0.092)**** |
| 5. I improved my ability to suggest ideas or hypotheses | 2.87 | (0.099) | 3.08 | (0.109) |
| 6. I improved my ability to talk clearly about the case | 2.99 | (0.096) | 3.22 | (0.109) |
| 7. These sessions were valuable in terms of developing new skills | 2.88 | (0.120) | 3.39 | (0.106)*** |
| 8. The concept map for each case history was useful | 2.07 | (0.113) | 2.71 | (0.119)**** |
| 9. The group formulated learning goals during the sessions | 2.67 | (0.126) | 3.00 | (0.119) |
| 10. The group collected new information after the session | 3.71 | (0.139) | 3.78 | (0.131) |
| 11. These sessions encouraged teamwork by the group | 2.91 | (0.130) | 3.16 | (0.119) |
| 12. The discussions would have been improved by having a tutor present | 2.35 | (0.152) | 2.24 | (0.147) |
