Measuring the Effectiveness of Faculty Facilitation Training in Problem-Based Learning in a Medical School
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effectiveness of a faculty training program for problem-based learning (PBL) facilitation. A multi-level approach was used, following Kirkpatrick’s levels for assessing training effectiveness. Data were obtained from (1) tutor training workshop evaluations, (2) a survey of tutors’ attitudes and beliefs, (3) changes in tutors’ perceptions of their teaching styles through pre- and post-testing using the Teaching Styles Inventory (TSI), (4) changes in student attitudes and self-perceptions of their learning styles through pre- and post-testing using the Self-directed Learning Readiness Scale (SDLRS) and the revised Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ). The authors contend that measures were obtained for Kirkpatrick levels 1, 2, and 4 (Reaction, Learning, and Results, respectively) but that no measure of Kirkpatrick level 3 was completed. Overall, it was concluded that the training program was successful as measured at Kirkpatrick level 1 but was equivocally successful as assessed at higher levels in Kirkpatrick’s model. In addition to drawing conclusions regarding the training program for facilitators in PBL, limitations and challenges associated with assessment at each level are highlighted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it