MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759352286 · doi:10.15694/mep.2017.000168

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

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

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedEdPublish · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingCurriculumMedical educationThematic analysisExperiential learningDescriptive statisticsPsychologyMedicineFaculty developmentProfessional developmentQualitative researchPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from 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>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it