CONTEXT: Peer-assisted learning (PAL) has been recommended as an educational strategy to improve students' skill acquisition and supplement the role of the clinical instructor (CI). How frequently students actually engage in PAL in different settings is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived frequency of planned and unplanned PAL (peer modeling, peer feedback and assessment, peer mentoring) in different settings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Laboratory and collegiate clinical settings. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 933 students, 84 administrators, and 208 CIs representing 52 (15%) accredited athletic training education programs. INTERVENTION(S): Three versions (student, CI, administrator) of the Athletic Training Peer Assisted Learning Survey (AT-PALS) were administered. Cronbach α values ranged from .80 to .90. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Administrators' and CIs' perceived frequency of 3 PAL categories under 2 conditions (planned, unplanned) and in 2 settings (instructional laboratory, collegiate clinical). Self-reported frequency of students' engagement in 3 categories of PAL in 2 settings. RESULTS: Administrators and CIs perceived that unplanned PAL (0.39 ± 0.22) occurred more frequently than planned PAL (0.29 ± 0.19) regardless of category or setting (F(1,282) = 83.48, P < .001). They perceived that PAL occurred more frequently in the collegiate clinical (0.46 ± 0.22) than laboratory (0.21 ± 0.24) setting regardless of condition or category (F(1,282) = 217.17, P < .001). Students reported engaging in PAL more frequently in the collegiate clinical (3.31 ± 0.56) than laboratory (3.26 ± 0.62) setting regardless of category (F(1,860) = 13.40, P < .001). We found a main effect for category (F(2,859) = 1318.02, P < .001), with students reporting they engaged in peer modeling (4.01 ± 0.60) more frequently than peer mentoring (2.99 ± 0.88) (P < .001) and peer assessment and feedback (2.86 ± 0.64) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Participants perceived that students engage in unplanned PAL in the collegiate clinical setting with a stronger inclination toward engagement in peer modeling. Educators should develop planned PAL activities to capitalize on the inherent desire of the students to collaborate with their peers.
CONTEXT: Peer-assisted learning (PAL) has been recommended as an educational strategy to improve students' skill acquisition and supplement the role of the clinical instructor (CI). How frequently students actually engage in PAL in different settings is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived frequency of planned and unplanned PAL (peer modeling, peer feedback and assessment, peer mentoring) in different settings. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Laboratory and collegiate clinical settings. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 933 students, 84 administrators, and 208 CIs representing 52 (15%) accredited athletic training education programs. INTERVENTION(S): Three versions (student, CI, administrator) of the Athletic Training Peer Assisted Learning Survey (AT-PALS) were administered. Cronbach α values ranged from .80 to .90. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Administrators' and CIs' perceived frequency of 3 PAL categories under 2 conditions (planned, unplanned) and in 2 settings (instructional laboratory, collegiate clinical). Self-reported frequency of students' engagement in 3 categories of PAL in 2 settings. RESULTS: Administrators and CIs perceived that unplanned PAL (0.39 ± 0.22) occurred more frequently than planned PAL (0.29 ± 0.19) regardless of category or setting (F(1,282) = 83.48, P < .001). They perceived that PAL occurred more frequently in the collegiate clinical (0.46 ± 0.22) than laboratory (0.21 ± 0.24) setting regardless of condition or category (F(1,282) = 217.17, P < .001). Students reported engaging in PAL more frequently in the collegiate clinical (3.31 ± 0.56) than laboratory (3.26 ± 0.62) setting regardless of category (F(1,860) = 13.40, P < .001). We found a main effect for category (F(2,859) = 1318.02, P < .001), with students reporting they engaged in peer modeling (4.01 ± 0.60) more frequently than peer mentoring (2.99 ± 0.88) (P < .001) and peer assessment and feedback (2.86 ± 0.64) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Participants perceived that students engage in unplanned PAL in the collegiate clinical setting with a stronger inclination toward engagement in peer modeling. Educators should develop planned PAL activities to capitalize on the inherent desire of the students to collaborate with their peers.
Authors: Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Andreas Minassian; Jonathan David Hendrie; Laura Benner; Anas Amin Preukschas; Hannes Götz Kenngott; Lars Fischer; Beat P Müller-Stich; Felix Nickel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-09-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Felix Nickel; Felix Jede; Andreas Minassian; Matthias Gondan; Jonathan D Hendrie; Tobias Gehrig; Georg R Linke; Martina Kadmon; Lars Fischer; Beat P Müller-Stich Journal: Trials Date: 2014-04-23 Impact factor: 2.279