How can a lesson be made interesting or even irresistible? How can teachers convey to students a love for the profession and a passion for study? How can motivations and stimuli for professional growth be transmitted through fair assessment? These are questions that, in the past, few teachers were used to asking, as their teaching methods were practically never questioned. The educational system in Italy, since time immemorial, has remained centred on classical face-to-face teaching methods, which today are unanimously considered less effective than other more interactive and engaging methods. This is not to say that in the past our national Medical School did not yield excellent results—just consider the numerous Nobel Prizes in biomedical sciences that make up our prestigious record.
At UniCamillus, under the initiative of Professor Federica Wolf, Rector’s delegate for medical pedagogy, there has been a decision to modernize the approach to studying biomedical disciplines, in an attempt to be more suitable and effective for Generation Z students.
As the chair of General Pathology on the MSc in Medicine and Surgery and MSc in Dentistry and Dental Prosthetics, Professor Wolf has organized a series of 10 in-person meetings for teachers from May to October 2024, addressing biomedical pedagogy topics. The project, titled Teaching Methodology Academy, aims to help our tutors understand that there are teaching models other than the traditionally applied ones, which are more suitable for current university and professional training.
“We ask tutors to put themselves to the test”, explained Professor Wolf, “to return to the classroom to question how to make their teaching approach more effective and improve results, not only in terms of student satisfaction but also in terms of performance”.
Has technological advancement drastically changed the way students learn information?
“The first challenge is to adapt to this global change in the dissemination of knowledge. We have to deal with an informational/educational process that is no longer controlled by the teacher but that the student can verify or discuss during the lesson itself, or worse yet, with students who, confident that they can get all necessary information as and when they want, do not make an effort to follow what the teacher is saying.”
Doesn’t this pose a problem of authority and verifiability of sources?
“Of course, and to address this issue, a specific discipline has emerged that teaches the methodology of scientific research. This discipline clarifies the logical and methodological path of scientific research. The student learns how to find reliable or even the most authoritative information, what to expect from different types of scientific articles, how to verify their scientific solidity, how to design and plan a scientific project, and how to present scientific data in written or oral form. The student must know these fundamental principles to correctly interpret what they read, focus on the author’s hypothesis, and judge the solidity of the data supporting the hypothesis. These topics are addressed in the final years of study, just before students prepare to write their dissertation. Here at UniCamillus we address scientific methodology in the fifth year of the MSc Medicine and Surgery to guide students in consulting the scientific literature and selecting important information for their dissertation. The current trend is to start teaching this in the first years of the course, precisely considering the free access to scientific information and to encourage curiosity and self-learning. By identifying the right moment during their studies, students will understand that scientific knowledge, which advances at an increasingly rapid pace, is a fundamental topic that will accompany them throughout their professional careers.”
Alright, but what does this methodology consist of, and how are changes in teaching methods implemented?
“By stimulating the proactivity of the students themselves. Abandoning traditional face-to-face lectures means that the tutor is no longer the one who is transmitting their knowledge to the student, who are expected to passively assimilate it. Today, as students are in a position to find information on their own, the teacher must favour student-centred methods that allow their learners to build knowledge based on paradigmatic examples that stimulate their curiosity and teach them the most effective method to build their knowledge. The teacher, based on his/her experience and knowledge, can guide the rational path and offer the details to build the learning process. The assessment of learning—the exam—can be conducted so as to verify that the student has learned the concepts but also knows how to apply them practically.”
A drastic change of mindset, as well as a method, for both teachers and students.
“Exactly. This course aims to provide colleagues with ideas to modernize their lessons because it is clear that such a radical change cannot take place quickly. A teacher must have the opportunity to learn about alternative methods to traditional teaching, to experiment with systems that stimulate students’ attention and curiosity. Moreover, data on learning effectiveness is clear: currently, a student in an 8-hour day of lectures inevitably experiences a drastic drop in learning long before the eighth hour. Generation Z, from the beginning of their school journey, is used to learning differently from the way we did. A change that takes this generational aspect into account is necessary. Additionally, there is a practical aspect: ideally, to stimulate teacher-student interactivity, we should work with groups of 20-30 students, which requires a completely different organization from the current one, where even if a course is divided into sections, we might have to manage groups of several hundred students. It is obvious that with large groups it is much more difficult to stimulate and monitor the active involvement of each participant. During the course, we illustrate interactive methods that can also be used with large groups, such as question-answer detection systems through applications like Mentimeter, Wooclap, Poll Everywhere, etc.—strategies for dividing even large classes into groups that can discuss or compete on a question, a clinical case, or a decision to be made. It may seem strange, but there are ways of turning learning into a game. That’s gamification. Why not do it if it works?!”
What are the reactions of the teachers on the course regarding having to question their traditional teaching methods?
“The UniCamillus teaching staff are very heterogeneous. There are people with considerable experience in both research and teaching, but also many very young teachers who, although they are excellent professionals, have little teaching experience. There are those who are excellent doctors or have worked in prestigious research laboratories but have no classroom experience. It is interesting to note that despite differences in age, experience, and training, the reactions have been quite uniform: interest in this discipline and curiosity about the innovative methods described. Obviously, there are always some who believe they do not want to change what they have been doing for many years, but the majority move from curiosity to a desire to experiment, showing a willingness to change the way they teach. After all, almost everyone complains that students do not attend lectures, that they are distracted, that it is difficult to involve them and enable them to express their potential. So why not try alternative methods? Think of the success of IPE Days, where different professional figures worked together on clinical cases. On that occasion, everyone got involved, some taught others, learning from the nurse rather than the anesthetist or the dietitian or the psychologist. This was the students’ first experience of teamwork, the most widespread methodology in the biomedical field. My primary objective in organizing this course was to show colleagues that it is possible to teach by updating the traditional way of giving a lecture and that there are more effective teaching methods. On our course, there are Italian experts in medical pedagogy (Professors Fabrizio Consorti and Oliviero Riggio) who illustrate this masterfully; colleagues who have been experimenting with the use of clinical cases, flipped classrooms, practical examples, and problem-solving, for years. These meetings should inspire teachers to modernize traditional lessons, experiment with new learning methods, and stimulate active student participation. This course is an important first step as the topic is addressed organically and comprehensively through the 10 in-person modules. I know that change is very complex, as not only do teachers but also students need to change, working during the lesson and not relying solely on their tutor’s slides, which they can also get from colleagues or on the WebApp, as and when they want. They should become active participants in the learning process during the lesson, together with their tutor. I am sure that this approach would make an 8-hour lecture day more bearable, if not stimulating. We must be able to lead students towards this change—and this is quite a challenge.”
Are these alternative teaching methodologies already used abroad?
“Yes, in various parts of the world and with different nuances. Especially in Northern European countries, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, in the United States, and Canada, but the modernization process is also underway in France, Germany, and Spain. We are somewhat behind, and we must credit ANVUR—the National Agency for the Evaluation of Universities and Research—for guiding us towards it. It should still be emphasized that the Italian student is highly appreciated abroad for the solid foundation of their knowledge. We cannot deny that in Italy there is an important tradition in the teaching of medicine, although it is more knowledge-based than practical, but certainly recognized worldwide. However, regardless of excellences, of which we know many, the current issue is to train a class of medical students appropriate for our times and in harmony with other European states as well as globally. At this point, a spontaneous question arises: what does today’s doctor need to know and be able to do?—here we could consider another very current topic, the subject of debates and discussions. But the crucial point we are interested in today is to achieve clear and well-defined objectives in the triad of competencies: knowledge, being able to be, and being able to do.”
So, the ideal thing would be to integrate the two methodologies?
“The ideal thing would be not to give up traditional knowledge-based medicine, adequately integrated with being able to be and being able to do. This process should be started from the first years through practical medical experiences, simulations, or mannequins, and subsequently with the patient. This can be achieved by transforming traditional passive lectures into interactive ones that help the student perceive the practical importance of knowledge, so as to immediately experiment with the application of knowledge. The 5 Dublin descriptors (the objectives to be achieved during university studies for the acquisition of a professional title: bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, PhD) define this very well, guiding us in drafting study programmes, in describing courses and their educational objectives. On our teaching methodology course, Professor Angela Giusti, a pedagogue and also a UniCamillus lecturer, is in charge of explaining this practical experience: a student’s experimentation is a much more effective learning tool. Indeed, experience and practice make the best school. If we can teach our future doctors and healthcare professionals to learn actively, we will inevitably be able to train better qualified professionals.”