MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2913695426 · doi:10.4300/jgme-d-18-01093.1

Finding Your People in the Digital Age: Virtual Communities of Practice to Promote Education Scholarship

2019· editorial· en· W2913695426 sur OpenAlexaff
Lalena M. Yarris, Teresa M. Chan, Michael Gottlieb, Amy Miller Juvé

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Graduate Medical Education · 2019
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSocial Media in Health Education
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésScholarshipMentorshipCommunity of practicePublic relationsSociologyMedical educationComputer scienceKnowledge managementPedagogyMedicinePolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Medical educators have described a number of barriers that may prevent them from reaching their education scholarship goals, including limited time, resources, mentorship, access to expertise, and intrinsic reward.1 In the graduate medical education field, program directors may feel isolated, undervalued, and overextended. The administrative demands of residency and fellowship programs may leave little time for traveling to conferences or attending meetings that can provide opportunities for collaboration, mentorship, scholarship, and a sense of community. Engaging in a virtual community of practice (vCoP) may help educators overcome barriers to successfully generate scholarship.Communities of practice (CoPs) began to emerge in the education community among groups of people who interact around a common educational question, problem, or specific passion. Members of a CoP share information and advice, problem solve, and support each other. Over time, the group develops a deep, unique, and shared understanding about their practice and may produce educational materials such as manuals, standards, or tools to support their work.2 The structure of a CoP can be defined by the presence of 3 characteristics: (1) a mutual agreement where members establish group norms and build relationships with each other; (2) a joint enterprise where the group determines its focus or “domain”; and (3) a shared repertoire of resources.3–5Initially starting as communities that interact face-to-face, CoPs have evolved with technology, and now vCoPs are becoming commonplace.6 A vCoP is a CoP that utilizes web-based technology to facilitate communication and engagement.7 Derivative of Lave and Wenger's original theories on situated learning, the practice of educators gathering together to connect over their craft is not a new one.4,5 However, many institutions may have limited educational specialists.8,9 Therefore, vCoPs can provide access to a larger community with which to share knowledge, build relationships, and foster innovation.9,10 Virtual CoPs can also expand one's resources for collaboration independent of geography or time zones.11,12 This can facilitate study site recruitment and administration of multisite studies, which can produce robust scholarship.13 Furthermore, vCoPs can create opportunities for shared learning. One of the more popular versions of vCoP uses web-based resources, such as Twitter or Instagram. However, newer approaches can also include closed platforms (eg, Slack, Basecamp, WhatsApp, or Facebook groups).14–16Educators wishing to explore vCoPs that have evolved among the health professions may find their community in existing open, blog-based, or closed communities of practice (table). However, educators wanting to develop their own vCoP can take a stepwise approach that builds on literature-based recommendations (figure 1).2–5,17As vCoPs become more common in medical education, there will be increasing opportunities for scholarly work—from innovations and discovery research to online ethnography and program evaluation, through harnessing the power of archived comments to discovering what works (or doesn't) in these online environments.18,19 There are opportunities to galvanize individuals within a defined vCoP to support research efforts and to recruit study sites or participants.13,20,21 In our experience cultivating a vCOP to support and develop medical education scholarship, we found that an apprenticeship model allowed for variation in the levels of engagement based on participant interest, availability, and experience. New members have the opportunity to assume gradual progression to core membership (figure 2).14 It is important that members at all levels of engagement, from peripheral to leadership, experience benefits from participation and feel included and intrinsically motivated to contribute. In addition, succession plans should be built into the model to prevent core member burnout and maintain fresh perspectives, ideas, and enthusiasm.Ethical issues may arise when performing research using online communities. Individuals engaging in these online forums are creating open-access content, which may raise discussion and debate regarding data ownership and subject consent for participation in research. However, some research ethics boards have broadly approved research involving vCoP data, and it is likely that further taxonomy of best practices and ethical standards will follow trends in online data collection and analysis.22,23Graduate medical educators can at times feel lonely in their academic pursuits. Developing or engaging in a vCoP can facilitate the sharing of workload and expertise, and provide a support network to boost scholarship, career satisfaction, and ultimately advance the science of education. Burgeoning virtual opportunities are a great place to start for educators who struggle with limited time, local networks, or opportunities for travel.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,989
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,043

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0090,006
Communication savante0,0110,013
Science ouverte0,0020,026
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0120,002

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 Opus0,120
Tête enseignante GPT0,471
Écart entre enseignants0,351 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations82
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Graduate Medical EducationMême sujetSocial Media in Health EducationTravaux en français237 207