Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39268418›Full record

ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2024

Sustaining hybrid teaching as effective pedagogy at higher education institutions: Students' voices.

Zijing Hu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Zijing HuDepartment of Complementary Medicine, University of Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: There is a dire need to ensure higher education institutions employ effective pedagogy in their educational programs. Hybrid teaching has received increased attention in recent decades due to its effectiveness in improving learning outcomes. There is a lack of studies exploring students' views on hybrid teaching in acupuncture programs in the South African context. Objectives: Therefore, this study explored acupuncture students' views of hybrid teaching in the acupuncture program. The Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge Model was anchored in this study as a theoretical lens. Materials and Method: The author employed a qualitative single case study design within an interpretivist paradigm. A purposive sampling technique was adopted to recruit six participants for this study from an identified public university in South Africa. Participants were interviewed between March 2023 and May 2023. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis. Results: The findings of this study highlight positive student views of the hybrid model, emphasizing its benefits in optimizing the teaching and learning process. However, participants also identify barriers such as poor infrastructure and the absence of computer skills. The study underscores the need for substantial investment in technological facilities and faculty development programs to enhance lecturers' digital pedagogical competencies. Conclusions: While offering valuable insights into the specific context studied, limitations include the single-case design and the focus on a particular student cohort. Despite these limitations, the research contributes to the ongoing discourse on effective teaching methodologies in the dynamic landscape of higher education. Recommendations are proposed to address the identified challenges and foster an inclusive and technologically advanced learning environment in South African HEIs.

Indexed as

Acupuncturehigher educationhybrid teachingmedical studentsSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID39268418
PMCPMC11392259

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.