SBV Journal of Basic, Clinical and Applied Health Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 2 ( April-June, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Technology Deployment in Self-directed Learning: A Guide for New Path in Medical Education

Shree LD Singaravelu, Abilash Sasidharan Nair

Keywords : Education, Medical students, Self-directed learning, Technology

Citation Information : Singaravelu SL, Nair AS. Technology Deployment in Self-directed Learning: A Guide for New Path in Medical Education. 2021; 4 (2):51-53.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10082-03112

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 27-07-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Knowledge acquired by medical students in medical institutions becomes obsolete during their medical career. Thus, medical profession is in acute need for continuous learning that can be obtained by motivating and guiding students in the practice of self-directed learning (SDL). SDL enhances critical reasoning skills, amplifies curiosity, enhances the ability to recognize knowledge deficits, and enhances enthusiasm for learning. Technology is a captivating source of interactive tool in medical education. Exploiting technology brings deeper connections between student and educational content. It helps enhancing academic performance and also improves critical thinking. The right guidance for the utility of technology by the medical students will help them to become self-directed lifelong learners.

  1. Knowles M. The modern practice of adult education: andragogy versus pedagogy. New York: Associated Press; 1967.
  2. McWilliam E. Unlearning pedagogy. J Learn Des 2005;1(1):1–11. DOI: 10.5204/jld.v1i1.2.
  3. Knowles MS, Holton III EF, Swanson RA. The adult learner: the definitive classic in adult education and human resource development, 8th ed. Routledge; 2015. p. 267–278.
  4. Brookfield S. The concept of critical reflection: promises and contradictions. Eur J Soc Work 2009;12:293–304. DOI: 10.1080/13691450902945215.
  5. Carini R, Kuh G, Klein S. Student engagement and student learning: testing the linkages. Res High Educ 2006;47(1):1–32. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9.
  6. Kuh GD. In their own words: what students learn outside the classroom. Am Educ Res J 1993;30(2):277–304. DOI: 10.3102/00028312030002277.
  7. Kuh GD. What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. J Coll Stud Dev 2009;50(6):683–706. DOI: 10.1353/csd.0.0099.
  8. Kuh GD, Cruce TM, Shoup R, Kinsie J, Gonyea RM. Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. J High Educ 2008;79(5):540–563.
  9. Pike GR, Kuh GD, McCormick AC. An investigation of the contingent relationships between learning community participation and student engagement. Res High Educ 2011;52:300–322. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-010-9192-1.
  10. Tullis J, Benjamin A. On the effectiveness of self-paced learning. J Mem Lang 2011;64(2):109–118. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.11.002.
  11. Nelson Laird TF, Kuh GD. Student experiences with information technology and their relationship to other aspects of student engagement. Res High Educ 2005;46(2):211–233. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-004-1600-y.
  12. Hu S, Kuh GD. Computing experience and good practices in undergraduate education: does the degree of campus ‘wiredness’ matter? Educ Policy Anal Arch 2001;9:49.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.