MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2759352286 · doi:10.15694/mep.2017.000168

A novel resident-as-teacher curriculum: the role of experiential learning and coaching

2017· article· en· W2759352286 sur OpenAlex
Amy Tan, Оксана Бабенко, Alyssa England, Paul Humphries, Tracey Hillier

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.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueMedEdPublish · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInnovations in Medical Education
Établissements canadiensUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCoachingCurriculumMedical educationThematic analysisExperiential learningDescriptive statisticsPsychologyMedicineFaculty developmentProfessional developmentQualitative researchPedagogy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

<ns4:p>This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Background: Canadian family medicine residency programs have the challenge of training in a wide breadth of topics and competencies within a two-year program, including training residents to be effective teachers. There has been a gap in knowledge with regards to the most effective method to train residents to teach. We developed, implemented, and evaluated a novel multi-level resident-as-teacher (RAT) coaching curriculum to provide training and authentic experiences for family medicine residents in teaching medical students. Methods: A curriculum centred around multi-level coaching was designed where family medicine faculty members directly observed and provided feedback to family medicine residents teaching small group clinical skills to first and second year medical students. Family medicine residents received didactic training on how to provide effective feedback to students and manage small group dynamics, after reviewing the learning objectives that students were to achieve. This was followed by the authentic small group teaching experiences. A survey was sent out by email to all residents and faculty members who had participated in the RAT curriculum at the end of the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 academic years. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, correlation coefficients (Spearman's rho)). Qualitative analysis was completed through thematic analysis of respondents' written comments to open-ended survey questions. Results: 80% of 127 residents strongly agreed (26%) or agreed (54%) that the RAT program effectively developed their teaching skills. 57% either strongly agreed (17%) or agreed (40%) that the direct observation and feedback from faculty coaches helped to improve their teaching skills. There was a significant positive correlation between residents' perceptions of the usefulness of the feedback from faculty coaches and residents' perceptions of the overall RAT program's effectiveness in developing their teaching skills (r=0.42; p=0.001).Qualitative analysis revealed that residents perceived the RAT program to have solidified their own knowledge base for the content covered in the sessions. Residents also perceived a benefit of near-peer teaching for the medical students and an elevated family physicians' profile as teachers. They found the active learning experience increased their self-awareness of their teaching skills. Time away from clinical rotations and preparation time were derived as a potential drawback of the program.All faculty coaches agreed or strongly agreed that the RAT curriculum improved the teaching skills of family medicine residents. Thematic analysis of the faculty coaches' comments revealed that participating as coaches allowed for their own professional development in that their feedback and coaching skills improved. Conclusions: Our experiences and program evaluation of a novel multi-level resident-as-teacher coaching curriculum show that direct observation with feedback of authentic teaching activities is highly valued, and appears to be effective in developing resident teaching skills while fostering interest in future teaching.</ns4:p>

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,554
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,872

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,007
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,326
Écart entre enseignants0,314 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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