Design and First Impressions of a Small Private Online Course in Clinical Workplace Learning: Questionnaire and Interview Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical workplace learning takes place in a dynamic and complex learning environment that is designated as a site for patient care and education. Challenges in clinical training can be overcome by implementing blended learning, as it offers flexible learning programs suitable for student-centered learning, web-based collaboration, and peer learning. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate the Small Private Online Course (SPOC) by interns' first impressions and satisfaction measures (N=20) on using the SPOC. This study describes the design process of a SPOC from a theoretical and practical perspective and how it has been integrated into a clinical internship in internal medicine. METHODS: The design of the SPOC was based on general theoretical principles that learning should be constructive, contextual, collaborative, and self-regulated, and the self-determination theory to stimulate intrinsic motivation. Interns' impressions and level of satisfaction were evaluated with a web-based questionnaire and group interview. RESULTS: Interns thought the web-based learning environment to be a useful and accessible alternative to improve knowledge and skills. Peer learning and web-based collaboration through peer interaction was perceived as less effective, as student feedback was felt inferior to teacher feedback. The interns would prefer more flexibility within the course, which could improve self-regulated learning and autonomy. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation shows that the SPOC is a useful and accessible addition to the clinical learning environment, providing an alternative opportunity to improve knowledge and skills. Further research is needed to improve web-based collaboration and interaction in our course.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".