A study of the impact of a resident teacher education program on teaching self-efficacy, beliefs about teaching, and self-reported teaching behaviours
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Despite the fact that few residents have any specific training in teaching skills, the majority of them have significant teaching responsibilities throughout their residencies. Although residents have a positive attitude towards teaching, and look forward to their teaching role, a number of observational studies have found that few residents exhibit teaching skills conducive to learning. This research study reports the development, implementation, and evaluation of a resident Teacher Education Program (TEP), and examines its impact on internal medicine residents, more specifically, on residents’ (1) sense of teaching self-efficacy, (2) self reported teaching behaviours, (3) beliefs about teaching, and (4) interest in teaching. A quasi-experimental design was used and assignment of subjects (i.e., residents) was based on the existing Clinical Teaching Unit (CTU) rotation schedule. Theoretical guidelines for program development were based on several perspectives of adult education, and psychology. Most importantly, teaching self-efficacy was used as a motivational paradigm (Ashton, 1984), and was used as the main outcomes measure. The treatment group (n= 11) attended weekly one hour seminars longitudinally over the course of their CTU rotation (for a total of six sessions). The program was run a total of three times over the course of three rotations. General internal medicine residents had a positive outcome expectancy for teaching (i.e., teaching efficacy subscale). However, their efficacy beliefs concerning their own abilities as teachers was not rated as highly (self-efficacy subscale). Overall, residents had a positive attitude towards teaching. The resident TEP had no effect on residents’ teaching efficacy beliefs which were already positive. It did, however, have a statistically significant effect on their teaching self-efficacy scores which was twice that seen in the control group (0.4 vs. 0.2). A significant pre- and- post difference was found for 5 of 15 questions on beliefs about teaching (vs. 1 of 15 for the control group), and for 2 of 4 questions on interest in teaching (vs. 0 for control group). Residents participating in the TEP had a large and statistically significant improvement in self-reported teaching behaviours scores (vs. no difference in control group). A correlation coefficient of 0.21 was found for the associated changes between teaching efficacy and self-reported teaching behaviours. A correlation coefficient of 0.66 was found for the associated changes between teaching self-efficacy and self-reported teaching behaviours.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».