CONTEXT: Athletic training students (ATSs) are involved in various situations during the clinical experience that may cause them to express levels of frustration. Understanding levels of frustration in ATSs is important because frustration can affect student learning, and the clinical experience is critical to their development as professionals. OBJECTIVE: To explore perceived levels of frustration in ATSs during clinical situations and to determine if those perceptions differ based on sex. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with a survey instrument. SETTING: A total of 14 of 19 professional, undergraduate athletic training programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education in Pennsylvania. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Of a possible 438 athletic training students, 318 (72.6%) completed the survey. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): The Athletic Training Student Frustration Inventory was developed and administered. The survey gathered demographic information and included 24 Likert-scale items centering on situations associated with the clinical experience. Descriptive statistics were computed on all items. The Mann-Whitney U was used to evaluate differences between male and female students. RESULTS: A higher level of frustration was perceived during the following clinical situations: lack of respect by student-athletes and coaching staffs, the demands of the clinical experience, inability of ATSs to perform or remember skills, and ATSs not having the opportunity to apply their skills daily. Higher levels of frustration were perceived in female than male ATSs in several areas. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding student frustration during clinical situations is important to better appreciate the clinical education experience. Low levels of this emotion are expected; however, when higher levels exist, learning can be affected. Whereas we cannot eliminate student frustrations, athletic training programs and preceptors need to be aware of this emotion in order to create an environment that is more conducive to learning.
CONTEXT: Athletic training students (ATSs) are involved in various situations during the clinical experience that may cause them to express levels of frustration. Understanding levels of frustration in ATSs is important because frustration can affect student learning, and the clinical experience is critical to their development as professionals. OBJECTIVE: To explore perceived levels of frustration in ATSs during clinical situations and to determine if those perceptions differ based on sex. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with a survey instrument. SETTING: A total of 14 of 19 professional, undergraduate athletic training programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education in Pennsylvania. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Of a possible 438 athletic training students, 318 (72.6%) completed the survey. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S): The Athletic Training Student Frustration Inventory was developed and administered. The survey gathered demographic information and included 24 Likert-scale items centering on situations associated with the clinical experience. Descriptive statistics were computed on all items. The Mann-Whitney U was used to evaluate differences between male and female students. RESULTS: A higher level of frustration was perceived during the following clinical situations: lack of respect by student-athletes and coaching staffs, the demands of the clinical experience, inability of ATSs to perform or remember skills, and ATSs not having the opportunity to apply their skills daily. Higher levels of frustration were perceived in female than male ATSs in several areas. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding student frustration during clinical situations is important to better appreciate the clinical education experience. Low levels of this emotion are expected; however, when higher levels exist, learning can be affected. Whereas we cannot eliminate student frustrations, athletic training programs and preceptors need to be aware of this emotion in order to create an environment that is more conducive to learning.
Authors: Thomas G Bowman; Jay Hertel; Stephanie M Mazerolle; Thomas M Dodge; Heather D Wathington Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2014-09-26 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Julie M Cavallario; Bonnie L Van Lunen; Johanna M Hoch; Matthew Hoch; Sarah A Manspeaker; Shana L Pribesh Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Stephanie M Mazerolle; William A Pitney; Ashley Goodman; Christianne M Eason; Scott Spak; Kent C Scriber; Craig A Voll; Kimberly Detwiler; John Rock; Larry Cooper; Erica Simone Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 2.860