Nevertheless, as Steinert and Snell  indicate interactive approaches require utilization of various forms of questioning which “”can this website stimulate interest, arouse attention, serve as an ‘ice-breaker’ and provide
valuable feedback to the teacher and student alike”". Questioning and probing students effectively are skills that educators should be trained on during teaching enhancement programs for Faculty [22, 23]. The dynamics of the tutorial process is multifaceted including the educational methods, the tutor, and the learners. Concentrating on one of them will lead to an incomplete understanding of the educational process . Thus, it is important to take a holistic approach to evaluate teaching and learning. This opinion was supported by others . Contemporary instructional strategies that considers only instructor behaviors, is unlikely to succeed in improving the quality of education. Action
should be done at the same time on educational methods and promoting selleckchem active students’ learning. We tried to achieve that by developing an educational tool which actively involves the students in the learning process. In summary The interactive problem-solving approach for tutorials can be an effective enjoyable Compound high throughput screening alternative or supplement to traditional instruction for teaching traumatology to medical students. Training for this approach should be encouraged for Faculty development. Consent An informed consent was taken from patients to use their images for medical
education/publication. References 1. Goldstein GS, Benassi VA: Students’ and instructors’ beliefs about excellent lecturers and discussion leaders. Research in Higher Education 2006, 47:685–707.CrossRef 2. Brown G, Manouge M: AMEE Medical Education Gudie No 22: refreshing lecturing: Quinapyramine a guide for lecturers. Med Teach 2001, 23:231–234.CrossRefPubMed 3. Steinert Y, Snell LS: Interactive lecturing: strategies for increasing participation in large group presentations. Med Teach 1999, 21:37–42.CrossRef 4. Norman GR, Schmidt HG: The psychological basis of problem-based learning: a review of the evidence. Acad Med 1992, 67:557–565.CrossRefPubMed 5. Marsh HW: Students’ evaluations of university teaching: Research findings, methodological issues and directions for future research. Int J Educ Res 1987, 11:255–388.CrossRef 6. Johns M: Design of slides. J Audiov Media Med 1995, 18:121–128.PubMed 7. Cox KR, Ewan CE: Designing illustrations for teaching. In The Medical Teacher. Edited by: Cox KR, Ewan CE. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone; 1982:144–149. 8. Centre for Professional Development: S.E.C.A.T Student evaluations of courses and teaching booklet. The University of Auckland, Auckalnd, New Zealand; 1996:8–11. 9.