Kay Lawrence1, Katie A Chargualaf1, Pearman Parker2, Corey Nagel3. 1. School of Nursing, University of South Carolina Aiken, Aiken, South Carolina. 2. College of Nursing University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas. 3. College of Nursing, Hartford Center of Geriatric Nursing Excellence, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nurse educators have used peer teaching as a means of providing effective learning to peer learners and enhancing peer teachers' comfort with teaching. There is a lack of evidence related to providing feedback to peer teachers. Receiving feedback may enhance peer teachers' knowledge synthesis and understanding of the teaching process. METHODS: We utilized a mixed methods approach to determine if an evaluation instrument was valid and helpful to peer teachers. Both peer learners and educators completed evaluations of peer teachers, which were then compared. After receiving summarized feedback, peer teachers completed a survey regarding their experience. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between peer learner and educator ratings of peer teachers. Peer learners indicated they found peer teachers to be helpful in the high fidelity simulation setting. Peer teachers indicated satisfaction with the experience. Analysis of qualitative comments on peer-teacher surveys resulted in the identification of three themes: (a) validation of knowledge growth; (b) increased comfort with teaching; and (c) enhanced appreciation of teaching. CONCLUSIONS: Peer teaching may enhance knowledge gain and synthesis for both peer teachers and peer learners. Enhanced comfort with teaching may lead to enhanced comfort in teaching both patients and peers in future practice.
BACKGROUND: Nurse educators have used peer teaching as a means of providing effective learning to peer learners and enhancing peer teachers' comfort with teaching. There is a lack of evidence related to providing feedback to peer teachers. Receiving feedback may enhance peer teachers' knowledge synthesis and understanding of the teaching process. METHODS: We utilized a mixed methods approach to determine if an evaluation instrument was valid and helpful to peer teachers. Both peer learners and educators completed evaluations of peer teachers, which were then compared. After receiving summarized feedback, peer teachers completed a survey regarding their experience. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences between peer learner and educator ratings of peer teachers. Peer learners indicated they found peer teachers to be helpful in the high fidelity simulation setting. Peer teachers indicated satisfaction with the experience. Analysis of qualitative comments on peer-teacher surveys resulted in the identification of three themes: (a) validation of knowledge growth; (b) increased comfort with teaching; and (c) enhanced appreciation of teaching. CONCLUSIONS: Peer teaching may enhance knowledge gain and synthesis for both peer teachers and peer learners. Enhanced comfort with teaching may lead to enhanced comfort in teaching both patients and peers in future practice.