Exploring the Impact of Self-Directed Learning (SDL) and Student Learning Attitudes on the Cognitive Outcomes of First-Year Medical Undergraduates

Introduction: Acquiring knowledge and skills is a lifelong process for medical professionals, emphasizing constant self-update for better medical education & patient care (1). Teaching systems have evolved to enhance higher cognitive learning among undergraduates. Self-Directed Learning (SDL), introduced by Knowles in 1975, empowers students to diagnose learning needs, set goals, identify resources, & evaluate outcomes, inculcating curiosity, critical thinking, & problem-solving (2). However, SDL relies on student motivation & awareness which in turn are influenced by multiple other factors. The SRSSDL Tool evaluates readiness and identifies support areas which require support and shape themselves to adapt for better learning (3). This study assessed SDL’s efficacy and influencing factors among undergraduates. Methods: This study was performed on first-year medical students (n = 149) which was initiated four weeks before the session, with pre-reading materials shared two weeks earlier. The topic chosen for SDL was competency 4.1: " Structure and Function of Digestive System ". On the session day, students were divided into 10 groups. The students were divided randomly and team members list was distributed along with the pre-reading materials. The individual (iRAT) and team (tRAT) readiness assurance tests were conducted for 10 minutes, followed by 10-minute discussion. Then teams addressed Short Answer Questions (SAQs) for 20 minutes, followed by 10 mins discussion. The groups created questions, exchanged, and solved them within 15 minutes, presenting their answers in another 15-minute discussion. The session concluded with a summary (10 minutes). Attitudes and readiness were assessed using SRSSDL, followed by feedback (5-point Likert scale: audiovisual aids, teacher interaction, conduct of the session and session closure). The formative assessment was conducted after two weeks of SDL session, covering all topics taught during the preceding four weeks. Result: A total of 124 students (82.7%) participated in the SDL session. The iRAT and tRAT each comprised five questions, with mean scores of 4.8 and 5, respectively. Teams scored 83% on SAQs. Question framing was assessed based on objectivity, specificity, and cognitive load, scoring the mean score of 3.4 out of 5, while answers discussed scored 4.2 out of 5. The overall feedback is as follows: rating of 5 (68.05%), 4 (26.4%), 3 (3.15%) and 2 or 1 (2.4%). The positive correlation of feedback with components of SRSSDL tool (self-awareness, strategies and evaluation) is significant. A 1.5 fold improvement in formative assessment scores for SDL topics compared to traditional lectures highlighted the session’s efficacy. The components of SRSSDL tool (self-awareness, strategies and evaluation) is positively correlated with the scores in formative assessment. Conclusion: SDL effectively promotes engagement, better outcomes, and essential skills in first-year medical students. It fosters self-awareness, critical thinking, and collaboration, aligning with educational needs. Feedback confirms SDL's value in enhancing preparedness for self-guided learning. Integrating SDL with traditional methods in medical curricula can significantly improve student performance and readiness for the evolving demands of medical practice. References: 1. Murad MH, Coto-Yglesias F, Varkey P, et al. The effectiveness of self-directed learning in health professions education: a systematic review. Med Educ. 2010;44:1057-1068. 2. Knowles, M. S. Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for Learners and Teachers. Chicago: Follett Publishers. 1975. 3. Williamson SN. Development of a self-rating scale of self-directed learning. Nurse Res. 2007;14:66–83. Acknowledgement: I thank Department of Physiology for providing the space to work & support. I am thankful to my lovely students who actively participated in this study. This abstract was presented at the American Physiology Summit 2025 and is only available in HTML format. There is no downloadable file or PDF version. The Physiology editorial board was not involved in the peer review process.