THE COMPARISON STUDY ON THE EFFECT OF VIDEOTAPE AND DIDACTIC METHOD ON INSTRUCTION AND DEMONSTRATION DURING PRACTICAL SESSION: NURSING CONTEXT

Aim of the study/Purpose: Aim of this study is to compare the effect of videotaping method with didactic method during a demonstration of a practical session among nursing students. This study intended to investigate teaching methods which are the best during conducting the practical sessions.

Introduction in brief: Didactic teaching method is the common method that has been used by teaching institutions. For the nursing students, clinical skills practices are very important. There are many students in one class of a nursing program, hence, the probability of difficulties in observing the demonstration given by the lecturer is clearly very high. Many lectures took place in a big room and interaction does not feel like personal communication because the instructor stands so far away which cause the failure of understanding for the students. The limitations of traditional practical skill teaching have inspired a number of alternatives to the teaching methods including videotaping. The purpose of using video is to standardize the demonstration of procedure that received by students and also to rationalize the teaching program. Thus, current project was carried out to investigate the differences between videotape and didactic teaching methods among nursing students.

Procedures/Methods: A randomized crossover design was conducted at UiTM Selangor. Thirty participants were involved in this study. They have divided into two groups by sequence random sampling and questionnaires (students’ perception of teaching method) were given to the participants as pre-tests. In the first session, both groups were received different teaching methods (either videotaping or didactic method) at the same time but in different locations. After teaching demonstration, one volunteer student was performed a returned demonstration on the procedure which has been taught and guided by the procedure checklist and evaluated by the lecturer. After the completion of the first session, they were given 2 hours times for taking rest (washout period) and proceed with the second session where they switched the teaching methods. Post questionnaire was given after completing the second session. Both teaching methods were conducted by the same lecturer.

Results: Result showed that pre-test means for both groups had no significant different (p=>0.05). Post-test for videotape method showed significant in both groups with p=0.04. On the other hand, didactic method gave a significant result where both groups showed more understanding after attending didactic demonstration with p=0.00. Scores from the students who volunteered to perform return demonstration showed that there was no significant difference between both methods. Meaning, student able to score similar marks after attended both methods (Score after watching video was 26/30 and didactic method was 27/30, p=0.33). Overall, the study finding reveals that there were no significant differences between both teaching method as p-value is greater than 0.05 (Videotaping method versus didactic method, p = 0.12; 0.59).

Conclusion: Study concluded that there was no significant difference between both teaching methods, however, the majority of the participants prefer didactic teaching method with smaller students for a better view. The videotape also can be considered as a complementary method to enhance better understanding on the certain procedure.

Acknowledgments
Special thanks are dedicated to UiTM Selangor for providing research grant (ARAS grant -600-IRMI/DANA 5/3/ARAS (0088/2016) and for nursing students to involve in this project.