Search

Two separate courses in clinical pathology were presented to two groups of second-year medical students. The first (large) group was taught by the conventional lecture method; the other (small) group, by a self-instructional method for roughly half of the course, followed by the conventional lecture method for the second half of the course. The effectivenesses of the two methods were compared, based on performances on the final written examination. It was found that the self-instructional method was as effective as the conventional method in teaching clinical pathology, at least in teaching basic principles and interpretive clinical chemistry, as judged by the performances of the two groups. Surprisingly, the two groups differed significantly in performances on the portion of the course taught by similar methods.