| Literature DB >> 27225186 |
Jonny R Stephens1, Samuel Hall2, Matheus Gesteira Andrade2, Scott Border2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Near-peer teaching (NPT) is a highly valuable resource for the education of medical undergraduates with benefits to the students, teachers themselves, and the faculty. To maximise the effectiveness of such teaching programmes, the aim of this study was to determine how the student learning experience, and underpinning social and cognitive congruencies changes as the learner-teacher distance increases.Entities:
Keywords: Cognitive congruence; Medical education; Near-peer teaching; Neuroanatomy; Social congruence
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27225186 PMCID: PMC5104784 DOI: 10.1007/s00276-016-1700-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Radiol Anat ISSN: 0930-1038 Impact factor: 1.246
Fig. 1Diagram illustrating the organisation of the NPT sessions. Session 1 was divided into two 1-h-long sessions, where group 1 was taught cranial nerves 1–6 by an SMS initially and later taught cranial nerves 7–12 by a JD and vice versa for group 2. During session 2, the students were distributed evenly between the SMS and JD teachers for a 1-h-long session on the spinal tracts
Feedback criteria assessed on the questionnaire with associated ratings for, and comparisons between, the SMS and JD
| SMS mean average rating (max score 5) | JD mean average rating (max score 5) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4.26 | 4.00 | 0.005 |
| Relevance of content | 4.59 | 4.24 | <0.0001 |
| Explanations | 4.26 | 4.10 | 0.205 |
| Ability to solve weaknesses | 3.90 | 3.53 | 0.001 |
| Delivery | 4.20 | 3.92 | 0.006 |
| Use of time | 4.19 | 3.77 | <0.0001 |
| Approachability of teacher | 4.60 | 4.41 | 0.067 |
| Confidence about exams | 3.49 | 3.29 | 0.069 |
| Enjoyment | 3.96 | 3.65 | 0.007 |
Those rating that showed statistically significant differences between groups are highlighted in blue
Feedback criteria assessed on the questionnaire with associated ratings for, and comparisons between, each teacher type
| 3YMS mean average rating (max score 5) | 4YMS mean average rating (max score 5) | 5YMS mean average rating (max score 5) | JD mean average rating (max score 5) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 4.27 | 4.26 | 4.03 | 4.00 | 0.005 |
| Perceived knowledge increase (%) | 0.99 (20 %) | 0.89 (18 %) | 0.66 (13 %) | 0.80 (16 %) | 0.006 |
| Relevance of content | 4.54 | 4.64 | 4.25 | 4.24 | <0.0001 |
| Explanations | 4.25 | 4.28 | 4.03 | 4.10 | 0.200 |
| Ability to solve weaknesses | 3.87 | 3.92 | 3.74 | 3.53 | 0.011 |
| Delivery | 4.18 | 4.25 | 3.94 | 3.92 | 0.006 |
| Use of time | 4.17 | 4.21 | 4.00 | 3.77 | 0.002 |
| Approachability of teacher | 4.65 | 4.55 | 4.25 | 4.41 | 0.011 |
| Confidence about exams | 3.45 | 3.51 | 3.47 | 3.29 | 0.307 |
| Enjoyment | 3.96 | 3.94 | 3.66 | 3.65 | 0.012 |
Those rating that showed statistically significant differences between groups are highlighted in blue
Fig. 2Schematic of the NPT spectrum, depicting how the ‘learners experience’ of a NPT session varies with increasing distance between the learner and the student. Note the area in red, the so called ‘transition zone’ before the proposed threshold of graduation