Teaching Tissue Repair Through an Inquiry-Based Learning Bioadhesives Module

Abstract

Bioadhesives are an important class of biomaterials for wound healing, hemostasis, and tissue repair. To develop the next generation of bioadhesives, there is a societal need to teach trainees about their design, engineering, and testing. This study designed, implemented, and evaluated a hands-on, inquiry-based learning (IBL) module to teach bioadhesives to undergraduate, master's, and PhD/postdoctoral trainees. Approximately 30 trainees across three international institutions participated in this IBL bioadhesives module, which was designed to last approximately 3 h. This IBL module was designed to teach trainees about how bioadhesives are used for tissue repair, how to engineer bioadhesives for different biomedical applications, and how to assess the efficacy of bioadhesives. The IBL bioadhesives module resulted in significant learning gains for all cohorts; whereby, trainees scored an average of 45.5% on the pre-test assessment and 69.0% on the post-test assessment. The undergraduate cohort experienced the greatest learning gains of 34.2 points, which was expected since they had the least theoretical and applied knowledge about bioadhesives. Validated pre/post-survey assessments showed that trainees also experienced significant improvements in scientific literacy from completing this module. Similar to the pre/post-test, improvements in scientific literacy were most significant for the undergraduate cohort since they had the least amount of experience with scientific inquiry. Instructors can use this module, as described, to introduce undergraduate, master's, and PhD/postdoctoral trainees to principles of bioadhesives.

Keywords: Bioadhesive; Biomaterials; Engineering education; Hands-on experiment; Inquiry-based learning; Tissue repair.

FIGURE 1.

Schematic diagram showing the procedure of adhering two substrates together for the inquiry-based learning (IBL) bioadhesives module.

FIGURE 2.

Trainees showed significant learning gains via pre/post-test assessment. (a) Average trainee pre/post-test score. (b) Percentage of students who answered individual questions correctly on pre/post-test assessments. ****p<0.00001.

FIGURE 3.

Trainees in all cohorts scored higher on post-test assessment, demonstrating significant learning gains. Average trainee pre/post-test score (top) and percentage of students who answered individual questions correctly on pre/post-test assessments (bottom) for (a) Undergraduate, (b) Master’s, and (c) PhD/postdoctoral trainees. *p<0.05.

FIGURE 4.

Trainees showed significant improvements in scientific literacy via pre/post-survey assessment. **p<0.01, ***p<0.0001.

FIGURE 5.

Undergraduate cohort showed significant improvements in scientific literacy, while master’s and PhD/postdoctoral trainees showed trending, but not statistically significant, improvements. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001. Dashed lines indicate trending, but not statistically significant, differences (0.05 < p < 0.10).