Show simple item record

Optimizing teaching effectiveness in dental education for a new generation of learners

dc.contributor.authorWalinski, Christopher J.
dc.contributor.authorOntiveros, Joe C.
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Fei
dc.contributor.authorCrain, Geralyn
dc.contributor.authorVardar-Sengul, Saynur
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-03T21:07:48Z
dc.date.available2024-03-03 16:07:47en
dc.date.available2023-03-03T21:07:48Z
dc.date.issued2023-02
dc.identifier.citationWalinski, Christopher J.; Ontiveros, Joe C.; Liu, Fei; Crain, Geralyn; Vardar-Sengul, Saynur (2023). "Optimizing teaching effectiveness in dental education for a new generation of learners." Journal of Dental Education 87(2): 182-188.
dc.identifier.issn0022-0337
dc.identifier.issn1930-7837
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/175870
dc.description.abstractPurposeToday’s dental students, Generation Z (Gen Z), are said to learn differently than those of previous generations. As generations of dental students vary, our teaching styles must keep up with unique and changing groups of individuals.MethodsThis article discusses learner-focused teaching methods including techniques that address the characteristics of Gen Z learners. Blended learning methods that combine online media with traditional face-to-face sessions, team-based learning, and a flipped classroom format have previously been suggested as ways to increase learning effectiveness and student satisfaction.ResultsIn this paper, the characteristics and preferences of Gen Z students are described along with the challenges they create with conventional teaching methods. An implementation strategy using principles from organizational agility and Bolman and Deal’s Four Frames Model is proposed for dental schools to transition to a more learner-centered teaching approach.ConclusionsThe suggested strategy can be customized and could be useful to schools that wish to enhance their teaching methods to meet the learning needs of Gen Z dental students and beyond.
dc.publisherCenter for the Future of Work
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherGeneration Z
dc.subject.otherinstitutional/organizational development
dc.subject.otherteaching effectiveness
dc.subject.otherteam-based learning
dc.subject.otherdental education
dc.subject.otherblended learning
dc.subject.othercurriculum innovation
dc.subject.othercomputer-assisted instruction
dc.subject.otherflipped classroom
dc.titleOptimizing teaching effectiveness in dental education for a new generation of learners
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistry
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/175870/1/jdd13108.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/175870/2/jdd13108_am.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jdd.13108
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Dental Education
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSlaven CM, Wells MH, DeSchepper EJ, et al. Effectiveness of and dental student satisfaction with three teaching methods for behavior guidance techniques in pediatric dentistry. J Dent Educ. 2019; 83 ( 8 ): 966 - 972.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHenzi D, Davis E, Jasinevicius R, et al. North American dental students’ perspectives about their clinical education. J Dent Educ. 2006; 70 ( 4 ): 361 - 377.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceParry E, Urwin P. Generational differences in work values: a review of theory and evidence. Int J Manag Rev. 2011; 13: 79 - 96.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePalley W, Gen Z. Digital in their DNA [Online]. Available from: https://www.jwtintelligence.com/2012/04/april-trend-report-examines-the-digital-world-of-gen-z/. 2012.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTurner A. Generation Z: technology and social interest. J Individ Psychol. 2015; 71 ( 2 ): 103 - 113.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceParker K, Igielnik R. On the cusp of adulthood and facing an uncertain future: what we know about Gen Z so far. Pew Research Center. 2014.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChicca J, Shellenbarger T. Connecting with generation z: approaches in nursing education. Teach Learn Nurs. 2018; 13 ( 3 ): 180 - 184.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIsaacs AN, Scott SA, Nisly SA. Move out of z way millennials. Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2020; 12 ( 12 ): 1387 - 1389.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCetin M, Halisdemir M. School administrators and generation z students’ perspectives for a better educational setting. J Educ Train Stud. 2019; 7 ( 2 ): 84 - 97.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCho MJ, Hong JP. The emergence of virtual education during the COVID-19 pandemic: the past, present, and future of the plastic surgery education. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021; 74 ( 6 ): 1413 - 1421.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDost S, Hossain A, Shehab M, et al. Perceptions of medical students towards online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national cross-sectional survey of 2721 UK medical students. BMJ Open. 2020; 10 ( 11 ): e042378.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSinghi EK, Dupuis MM, Ross JA, et al. Medical hematology/oncology fellows’ perceptions of online medical education during the COVID-19 Pandemic. J Cancer Educ. 2020; 35 ( 5 ): 1034 - 1040.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSadid-Zadeh R, Wee A, Li R, et al. Audience and presenter comparison of live web-based lectures and traditional classroom lectures during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Prosthodont. 2021; 30 ( 5 ): 412 - 419.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSener J. Updated e-learning definitions. Definitions of E-learning courses and programs, version 2.0. Online Learning Consortium. 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTurner A. Generation Z: technology and social interest. J Individ Psychol. 2015; 71 ( 2 ): 103 - 113.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePerera C, Zainuddin Z, Piaw C, et al. The pedagogical frontiers of urban higher education: blended learning and co-lecturing. Educ Urban Soc. 2020; 52 ( 9 ): 1305 - 1329.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArnold-Garza S. The flipped classroom teaching model and its use for information literacy instruction. Commun Info Lit. 2014; 8 ( 1 ): 7 - 22.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMahesh J, Bhat A, Suresh R. Are Gen Z values the new disruptor for future educational institutions? J Higher Ed Theory Prac. 2021; 21 ( 12 ): 102 - 123.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBurgess A, van Deggele C, Roberts C, et al. Team-based learning: design, facilitation and participation. BMC Med Educ. 2020; 20: 461.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceQutieshat AS, Abusamak MO, Maragha TN. Impact of blended learning on dental students’ performance and satisfaction in clinical education. J Dent Educ. 2020; 84 ( 2 ): 135 - 142.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNijakowski K, Lehmann A, Zdrojewski J, et al. The effectiveness of the blended learning in conservative dentistry with endodontics on the basis of the survey among 4th-year students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021; 18 ( 9 ): 4555.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePark SE, Howell TH. Implementation of a flipped classroom educational model in a predoctoral dental course. J Dent Educ. 2015; 79 ( 5 ): 563 - 570.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVanka A, Vanka S, Wali O. Flipped classroom in dental education: a scoping review. Eur J Dent Educ. 2020; 24 ( 2 ): 213 - 226.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBolman LG, Deal TE. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. Jossey-Bass; 2013.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTallon PP, Pinsonneault A. Competing perspectives on the link between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility: insights from a mediation model. MIS Q. 2011; 35 ( 2 ): 463 - 486.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMallon D. Getting decision rights right. Deloitte Insights. [Online] Available from: https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/talent/organizational-decision-making.html. 2020.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMenon S, Suresh M. Factors influencing organizational agility in higher education. Benchmarking. 2021; 28 ( 1 ): 307 - 332.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBerk A, Kaše R. Establishing the value of flexibility created by training: applying real options methodology to a single HR practice. Org Sci. 2010; 21 ( 3 ): 765 - 780.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhou KZ, Wu F. Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strat Mgmt J. 2010; 31 ( 5 ): 547 - 561.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePalatta AM, Kassebaum DK, Gadbury-Amyot CC, et al. Change is here: ADEA CCI 2.0 – a learning community for the advancement of dental education. J Dent Educ. 2017; 81 ( 6 ): 640 - 648.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGausby A. Microsoft attention spans research report. Microsoft Corporation. 2015.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePriestly T, Cognizant WilliamsB. Protecting Customers from Information Overload. Center for the Future of Work; 2021.
dc.working.doiNOen
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe its collections in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in them. We encourage you to Contact Us anonymously if you encounter harmful or problematic language in catalog records or finding aids. More information about our policies and practices is available at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.