Time Spent Seeking Resources The Adaptive Learner: An Analysis of Differing Perspectives Whereby Medical Students Tailor Resources to Advance Learning Crystal Graff¹ Kristina Kaljo PhD² Robert Treat PhD³ Kathryn Dielentheis MD² ¹Cohen Fellowship for Medical Education, ²Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, ³Office of Academic Affairs Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53226 Background Results Medical schools have historically utilized instructor-centered lectures to teach medical students the basic sciences.¹ Recently, students have become inundated with new, high-quality resources to enhance lecture-based content.² The purpose of this study is to analyze perceptions between students and faculty regarding supplemental educational resources and the efficacy of lecture-based teaching. Fig 3: Resources Used by Students vs. Those Faculty are Aware Of Methods In August 2017, separate surveys were sent to first-, second- and third-year students and basic science teaching faculty A 13-item survey was distributed to students, of which 155 of 711 (23%) responded. An 11-item survey was distributed to faculty, of which 81 of 376 (22%) faculty responded. Survey items used categorical and 10-point scales (10=high) and open-ended text-response. Mean scores compared with independent t-tests and Cohen’s d effect sizes. Percentage scores compared with Pearson chi-square tests. Pearson (r) and Spearman rho correlations used for relational analysis. IBM® SPSS® 24.0 used for statistical analysis. Grounded theory utilized to analyze text to build an understanding of the participant’s realities. Study is IRB approved. Results Faculty described lectures as the principal method of teaching, yet also highlighted the use of various teaching strategies: group work, clinical situations, and humor. Several students reported being at a “disadvantage” because they could not afford some of the commonly used educational resources. Students reported utilizing a significantly higher number of supplemental educational resources (mean (sd)=5.9 (2.0)) than faculty (4.7 (2.1)) perceived (Cohen’s d=0.6, p<.001) Faculty’s perception of meeting students’ learning needs was rated significantly higher (7.3 (1.3)) than students (5.9 (2.0)) (Cohen’s d=1.0/p<.001) Fig 1: Correlation Between Meeting Learning Needs and Time Spent Seeking Additional Educational Resources Conclusion Student and faculty perception’s regarding student learning needs were significantly different. Students incur additional financial burdens as they personally finance supplemental resources to advance learning. It is prudent for faculty and medical schools to be informed and provide access to essential educational tools to support the increasingly diverse student population.³ Time Spent Seeking Resources r= -.4 Learning Needs Met Fig 2: Time Spent Seeking Out Additional Educational Resources to Supplement Lecture (chi2= 22.54, p<.000) References 1. Harden R, Sowden S, Dunn W. Educational Strategies in Curriculum Development: The SPICES Model. Med Educ. 1984;18(4):284-297. 2. Conole G, de Laat M, Dillon T, Darby J. ‘Disruptive technologies’, ‘pedagogical innovation’: What’s new? Findings from an in-depth study of students’ use and perception of technology. Comput Educ. 2008;50(2):511–24.   3. Robin BR, McNeil SG, Cook DA, Agarwal KL, Singhal GR. Preparing for the Changing Role of Instructional Technologies in Medical Education. Acad Med. 2011;86(4):435-439.