Comparison of the effects of role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional teaching methods on nursing students’ self-efficacy
Guardado en:
| Udgivet i: | BMC Medical Education vol. 25 (2025), p. 1-9 |
|---|---|
| Hovedforfatter: | |
| Andre forfattere: | , |
| Udgivet: |
Springer Nature B.V.
|
| Fag: | |
| Online adgang: | Citation/Abstract Full Text Full Text - PDF |
| Tags: |
Ingen Tags, Vær først til at tagge denne postø!
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nab a2200000uu 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 3268438353 | ||
| 003 | UK-CbPIL | ||
| 022 | |a 1472-6920 | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s12909-025-07996-w |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a 3268438353 | ||
| 045 | 2 | |b d20250101 |b d20251231 | |
| 084 | |a 58506 |2 nlm | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Fallah-Karimi, Samaneh | |
| 245 | 1 | |a Comparison of the effects of role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional teaching methods on nursing students’ self-efficacy | |
| 260 | |b Springer Nature B.V. |c 2025 | ||
| 513 | |a Journal Article | ||
| 520 | 3 | |a Background and aimSelf-efficacy is a key component in developing professional readiness among nursing students. It plays a crucial role in enhancing clinical performance, decision-making quality, and self-confidence. Therefore, identifying and applying effective educational methods to improve this capability is one of the major challenges in nursing education systems. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of three teaching approaches—role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional instruction—on the self-efficacy of nursing students.MethodsThis Quasi-experimental study with three groups was conducted on 90 nursing students at Zahedan University of Medical sciences, Iran. Participants were randomly assigned to groups by drawing a card: red card (role-playing), yellow card (group discussion), and green card (traditional teaching). In the traditional teaching group, the educational content was delivered through lecture and PowerPoint presentation. In the group discussion method, students were divided into subgroups of six, and each subgroup was provided with a clinical scenario related to the topic. With the guidance of a facilitator, the subgroups engaged in discussion and exchange of ideas about the scenario. In the role-playing method, students were divided into groups of four, and each member assumed one of the roles: nurse, parent, child, or observer. Each group received a structured clinical scenario related to the subject, and the students enacted the assigned roles and performed the scenarios. Data were collected using the Clinical Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, completed by all students before and three months after the intervention.ResultsThe present study demonstrated the clear superiority of active learning methods, particularly role-playing, over traditional teaching in enhancing nursing students’ self-efficacy. Role-playing, by providing a safe environment for practice, led to a 55.7% improvement in self-efficacy (p < 0.001, d = 1.55) and enhanced students’ professional confidence. Group discussion was also effective, resulting in a 50.9% improvement (p = 0.02), whereas traditional teaching yielded only a negligible 0.8% increase (p = 0.78).ConclusionThe findings suggest that using active and interactive teaching methods—especially role-playing—can effectively enhance nursing students’ self-efficacy. These results can be utilized in designing student-centered and participatory educational programs. | |
| 651 | 4 | |a Iran | |
| 653 | |a Students | ||
| 653 | |a Nursing education | ||
| 653 | |a Collaboration | ||
| 653 | |a Teaching methods | ||
| 653 | |a Communication | ||
| 653 | |a Nurses | ||
| 653 | |a Cognition & reasoning | ||
| 653 | |a Skills | ||
| 653 | |a Role playing | ||
| 653 | |a Simulation | ||
| 653 | |a Active learning | ||
| 653 | |a Health education | ||
| 653 | |a Decision making | ||
| 653 | |a Data collection | ||
| 653 | |a Self-efficacy | ||
| 653 | |a Critical thinking | ||
| 653 | |a Problem based learning | ||
| 653 | |a Independent study | ||
| 653 | |a Pediatric nursing | ||
| 653 | |a Nursing skills | ||
| 653 | |a Educational Quality | ||
| 653 | |a Group Discussion | ||
| 653 | |a Grade Point Average | ||
| 653 | |a Environment | ||
| 653 | |a Educational Research | ||
| 653 | |a Learning Strategies | ||
| 653 | |a Educational Methods | ||
| 653 | |a College Faculty | ||
| 653 | |a Communication Skills | ||
| 653 | |a Job Skills | ||
| 653 | |a Interpersonal Relationship | ||
| 653 | |a Ethics | ||
| 653 | |a Instructional Effectiveness | ||
| 653 | |a Data Analysis | ||
| 653 | |a Evaluative Thinking | ||
| 653 | |a Course Content | ||
| 653 | |a Learner Engagement | ||
| 653 | |a College Science | ||
| 653 | |a Fidelity | ||
| 653 | |a Educational Strategies | ||
| 700 | 1 | |a Ghaljaie, Fereshteh | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Khalilzadeh-Farsangi, Zahra | |
| 773 | 0 | |t BMC Medical Education |g vol. 25 (2025), p. 1-9 | |
| 786 | 0 | |d ProQuest |t Healthcare Administration Database | |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |3 Citation/Abstract |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3268438353/abstract/embedded/Q8Z64E4HU3OH5N8U?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3268438353/fulltext/embedded/Q8Z64E4HU3OH5N8U?source=fedsrch |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |3 Full Text - PDF |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3268438353/fulltextPDF/embedded/Q8Z64E4HU3OH5N8U?source=fedsrch |