An appraisal of students' awareness of "self-reflection" in a first-year pathology course of undergraduate medical/dental education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-reflection and reflective practice are increasingly considered as essential attributes of competent professionals functioning in complex and ever-changing healthcare systems of the 21st century. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of students' awareness and understanding of the reflective process and the meaning of 'self-reflection' within the contextual framework of their learning environment in the first-year of their medical/dental education. We endorse that the introduction of such explicit educational tasks at this early stage enhances and promotes students' awareness, understanding, and proficiency of this skill in their continuing life-long health professional learning. METHODS: Over two years, students registered in first-year pathology at the University of Saskatchewan were introduced to a self-reflection assignment which comprised in the submission of a one-page reflective document to a template of reflective questions provided in the given context of their learning environment. This was a mandatory but ungraded component at the midterm and final examinations. These documents were individually analyzed and thematically categorized to a "5 levels-of-reflection-awareness" scale using a specially-designed rubric based on the accepted major theories of reflection that included students' identification of: 1) personal abilities, 2) personal learning styles 3) relationships between course material and student history 4) emotional responses and 5) future applications. RESULTS: 410 self-reflection documents were analyzed. The student self-awareness on personal learning style (72.7% level 3+) and course content (55.2% level 3+) were well-reflected. Reflections at a level 1 awareness included identification of a) specific teaching strategies utilized to enhance learning (58.4%), b) personal strengths/weaknesses (53%), and c) emotional responses, values, and beliefs (71.5%). Students' abilities to connect information to life experiences and to future events with understanding were more evenly distributed across all 5 levels of reflection-awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to self-reflection assignments in the early years of undergraduate medical education increases student awareness and promotes the creation of personal meaning of one's reactions, values, and premises in the context of student learning environments. Early introduction with repetition to such cognitive processes as practice tools increases engagement in reflection that may facilitate proficiency in mastering this competency leading to the creation of future reflective health professionals.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".