The future of E-Learning in medical education: current trend and future opportunity

Abstract

A wide range of e-learning modalities are widely integrated in medical education. However, some of the key questions related to the role of e-learning remain unanswered, such as (1) what is an effective approach to integrating technology into pre-clinical vs. clinical training?; (2) what evidence exists regarding the type and format of e-learning technology suitable for medical specialties and clinical settings?; (3) which design features are known to be effective in designing on-line patient simulation cases, tutorials, or clinical exams?; and (4) what guidelines exist for determining an appropriate blend of instructional strategies, including on-line learning, face-to-face instruction, and performance-based skill practices? Based on the existing literature and a variety of e-learning examples of synchronous learning tools and simulation technology, this paper addresses the following three questions: (1) what is the current trend of e-learning in medical education?; (2) what do we know about the effective use of e-learning?; and (3) what is the role of e-learning in facilitating newly emerging competency-based training? As e-learning continues to be widely integrated in training future physicians, it is critical that our efforts in conducting evaluative studies should target specific e-learning features that can best mediate intended learning goals and objectives. Without an evolving knowledge base on how best to design e-learning applications, the gap between what we know about technology use and how we deploy e-learning in training settings will continue to widen.

Keywords: Computer-Assisted Instruction; Education, Medical; Learning.

Fig. 1

Comparison of percentages of 125 US medical schools reporting the use of eductional software program in basic sciences curriculum in 1998 and 2002.

Fig. 2

Comparison of percentages of 125 US medical schools reporting the use of eductional software program in clinical clerkships in 1998 and 2002.

Fig. 3

Kirkpatrick's model of summative evaluation.