MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393231556 · doi:10.1080/10401334.2024.2328171

Characterization of Distinctive Teaching Practices in Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships: Perspectives From Students and Faculty

2024· article· en· W4393231556 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer E. Adams, Sheilah Jiménez, Vishnu Kulasekaran, Anne Frank, Catherine Ard, Kristina Sandquist, Heather Cassidy

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching and Learning in Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
FundersKettering Family Foundation
KeywordsThematic analysisCurriculumMedical educationFocus groupAutonomyLongitudinal studyCoachingPsychologyFaculty developmentQualitative researchMathematics educationPedagogyMedicineProfessional developmentSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phenomenon: Longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) are novel curricula that place medical students in long-term learning and coaching relationships with faculty and require adaptation of teaching practices on the behalf of faculty to maximize learning outcomes. An understanding of how teaching in an LIC model differs from teaching trainees in more traditional models is critical to ensuring curricular innovation success through faculty development. Approach: A qualitative approach was used to describe the teaching practices of faculty and learning experiences of student participants in longitudinal integrated clerkships in different clinical and community settings. Forty-five faculty and 20 students participated in focus groups. Thematic analysis of focus group data was used to identify differences and similarities between groups, sites, and specialties. Findings: Two groupings of themes emerged in thematic analysis: (1) precepting strategies distinctive to the longitudinal integrated clerkship model and (2) precepting strategies enhanced when employed in the LIC model. Distinct to the LIC model, preceptors and students described the importance of understanding the curricular structure and supporting students in longitudinal care of patients. Enhanced in the LIC model are the strategies of relationship-based teaching, support of autonomy, feedback, and support of longitudinal growth in skills. Insights: Students and faculty across LIC sites were broadly aligned in their opinions of best practices for teaching in an LIC model. The longitudinal relationship between student and faculty in an LIC distinguishes this model from traditional block rotations and a distinctive approach to successful teaching is demonstrated. Preceptors use time afforded to build trusting relationships with students, which created opportunity for novel teaching approaches and enhanced otherwise effective teaching strategies. A focus on orientation to the curricular model and support of longitudinal relationships with patients may serve as an anchor for faculty development efforts in the development of an LIC.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching and Learning in MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207