Number
429
Name
Balancing Didactic Instruction and Active Learning in Histology Laboratory Education: Novel Insights From A Multi-Cohort Analysis
Date & Time
Monday, June 8, 2026, 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM
Location Name
Oglethorpe Ballroom
Speakers
Authors
Dawn A Owens, Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Allopathic Medicine Nova Southeastern University
Anastasia Mashukova, Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Allopathic Medicine Nova Southeastern University
Melissa Armas, Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Allopathic Medicine Nova Southeastern University
Presentation Topic(s)
Instructional Methods
Description
PURPOSE:
Active learning continues to reshape medical education by shifting away
from professor-centered didactic instruction toward interactive modalities
that foster critical thinking, engagement, and discovery. Histology is
frequently perceived by students as low-yield due to limited representation
on standardized exams, contributing to reduced motivation and performance.
However, the discipline remains foundational for understanding pathological
processes. This study examines varying balances of didactic and
active-learning strategies across multiple cohorts to determine how
instructional design influences student engagement and perception.
METHODS:
Weekly histology laboratory sessions were delivered to first-year medical
students across four consecutive cohorts. The 2022–2023 cohorts received
traditional didactic instruction paired exclusively with virtual microscopy
(VM). In 2024, the course transitioned to a mixed model incorporating
approximately half didactic content and half active-learning, team-based
laboratory activities extending beyond VM. In 2025, a more structured hybrid
model was implemented: half of all sessions consisted of one-third didactic
instruction and two-thirds VM investigation, while the remaining sessions
used one-third didactic instruction paired with two-thirds diverse team-based
learning activities. Faculty content experts facilitated small-group
discussions for all cohorts. Participation rates and qualitative feedback
were collected to evaluate engagement and perceived value of each
instructional approach.
RESULTS:
Both the 2024 (n=65) and 2025 (n=64) active-learning formats demonstrated
100% participation. Student perceptions of the fully active-learning 2024
model were mixed, with several students reporting cognitive fatigue from
repetitive activity structures. The 2025 hybrid model was more positively
received, with learners noting improved engagement supported by alternating
activity types. Final evaluations are being analyzed to compare perceived
educational effectiveness across cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS:
Balancing active learning with targeted didactic instruction may optimize
histology learning. Alternating modalities appeared to reduce fatigue while
reinforcing visual diagnostic skills and sustaining curiosity. Ongoing
evaluation of student performance and perception will guide future
development of evidence-based histology laboratory curricula.
Active learning continues to reshape medical education by shifting away
from professor-centered didactic instruction toward interactive modalities
that foster critical thinking, engagement, and discovery. Histology is
frequently perceived by students as low-yield due to limited representation
on standardized exams, contributing to reduced motivation and performance.
However, the discipline remains foundational for understanding pathological
processes. This study examines varying balances of didactic and
active-learning strategies across multiple cohorts to determine how
instructional design influences student engagement and perception.
METHODS:
Weekly histology laboratory sessions were delivered to first-year medical
students across four consecutive cohorts. The 2022–2023 cohorts received
traditional didactic instruction paired exclusively with virtual microscopy
(VM). In 2024, the course transitioned to a mixed model incorporating
approximately half didactic content and half active-learning, team-based
laboratory activities extending beyond VM. In 2025, a more structured hybrid
model was implemented: half of all sessions consisted of one-third didactic
instruction and two-thirds VM investigation, while the remaining sessions
used one-third didactic instruction paired with two-thirds diverse team-based
learning activities. Faculty content experts facilitated small-group
discussions for all cohorts. Participation rates and qualitative feedback
were collected to evaluate engagement and perceived value of each
instructional approach.
RESULTS:
Both the 2024 (n=65) and 2025 (n=64) active-learning formats demonstrated
100% participation. Student perceptions of the fully active-learning 2024
model were mixed, with several students reporting cognitive fatigue from
repetitive activity structures. The 2025 hybrid model was more positively
received, with learners noting improved engagement supported by alternating
activity types. Final evaluations are being analyzed to compare perceived
educational effectiveness across cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS:
Balancing active learning with targeted didactic instruction may optimize
histology learning. Alternating modalities appeared to reduce fatigue while
reinforcing visual diagnostic skills and sustaining curiosity. Ongoing
evaluation of student performance and perception will guide future
development of evidence-based histology laboratory curricula.