Comparative effectiveness of cybernetic-based instruction and traditional lecture method on nursing students' academic achievement: A quasi-experimental study.

Authors

Amina Suleiman Rajah, Muhammad Ali Garko, Sadisu Bashir, Josephine Janet Ogodo Adikwu, Zuwaira Adam Jibreel, Japhet Haruna Jonah, Abosede Idayat Ajado, Ibrahim Usman Muhammad, Nabila Idris, Fatima Musa Aliyu, Rabi Uba

Published in

Nurse education today. Volume 166. Pages 107192. May 25, 2026. Epub May 25, 2026.

Abstract

Cybernetics describes how systems regulate performance through feedback control by setting goals, monitoring current states, comparing against a standard, and adapting actions to reduce discrepancies. In teaching, this feedback-loop logic can be operationalized as structured cycles of goal clarification, guided information seeking, peer sense-making, and formative feedback. However, evidence on a cybernetic-based instructional approach (CBI) for undergraduate nursing achievement remains limited in low-resource higher-education settings.
To compare the effects of Cybernetic-Based Instruction and the traditional lecture method on the academic achievement of undergraduate nursing students in maternal and child health nursing.
A quasi-experimental, non-equivalent group pretest-posttest study was conducted among fourth-year nursing students at Bayero University, Kano, Nigeria. Two intact cohorts from successive academic sessions received the same course content over a 13-week module. The 2024/2025 cohort received CBI (objective-driven inquiry, explicit credibility appraisal, peer synthesis, and iterative instructor/peer feedback), while the 2023/2024 cohort received conventional didactic lectures (PowerPoint/whiteboard with scheduled Q&A). Achievement was measured using a 50-item Maternal and Child Health Nursing Achievement Test (MCHNAT) administered pre- and post-instruction under supervised conditions. Analyses used within- and between-group tests and ANCOVA adjusting for pretest scores (α = 0.05).
Both groups improved significantly from pretest to posttest (p < 0.001). The CBI cohort achieved higher post-test scores and larger gains than the lecture cohort (73.12 ± 8.96 vs 60.62 ± 4.49; p < 0.001) and greater mean gain (31.59 ± 8.37 vs 17.94 ± 4.54; p < 0.001), and the adjusted between-group difference remained significant after controlling for baseline scores. ANCOVA confirmed a significant adjusted advantage for CBI (B = 13.13; 95% CI: 11.30-14.97; p < 0.001; partial ηp² = 0.554; R² = 0.605).
A structured cybernetic feedback-loop approach was associated with higher short-term achievement than lecturing. Further multi-site studies should examine longer-term retention and transfer, and strengthen internal validity where feasible.

PMID:
42224793
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 02 Jun 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.