Learning culture and feedback: an international study of medical athletes and musicians
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Feedback should facilitate learning, but within medical education it often fails to deliver on its promise. To better understand why feedback is challenging, we explored the unique perspectives of doctors who had also trained extensively in sport or music, aiming to: (i) distinguish the elements of the response to feedback that are determined by the individual learner from those determined by the learning culture, and (ii) understand how these elements interact in order to make recommendations for improving feedback in medical education. METHODS: Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 27 doctors or medical students who had high-level training and competitive or performance experience in sport (n = 15) or music (n = 12). Data were analysed iteratively using constant comparison. Key themes were identified and their relationships critically examined to derive a conceptual understanding of feedback and its impact. RESULTS: We identified three essential sources of influence on the meaning that feedback assumed: the individual learner; the characteristics of the feedback, and the learning culture. Individual learner traits, such as motivation and orientation toward feedback, appeared stable across learning contexts. Similarly, certain feedback characteristics, including specificity, credibility and actionability, were valued in sport, music and medicine alike. Learning culture influenced feedback in three ways: (i) by defining expectations for teachers and teacher-learner relationships; (ii) by establishing norms for and expectations of feedback, and (iii) by directing teachers' and learners' attention toward certain dimensions of performance. Learning culture therefore neither creates motivated learners nor defines 'good feedback'; rather, it creates the conditions and opportunities that allow good feedback to occur and learners to respond. CONCLUSIONS: An adequate understanding of feedback requires an integrated approach incorporating both the individual and the learning culture. Our research offers a clear direction for medicine's learning culture: normalise feedback; promote trusting teacher-learner relationships; define clear performance goals, and ensure that the goals of learners and teachers align.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle