BACKGROUND: The learner has a central role in feedback. We developed a feedback workshop for medical students grounded in two concepts: (1) Student agency in feedback and its interplay in the context of brief clinical attachments; (2) The educational alliance. AIMS: To determine whether a brief feedback training workshop prior to a series of two-week clinical attachments improves agentic student feedback behaviour (e.g. seeking, recognising, evaluating and utilising feedback) and student satisfaction with feedback. METHODS: We conducted surveys among three consecutive student cohorts undertaking three fortnightly paediatric clinical attachments. We pilot tested a workshop with Cohort 1 and implemented it for the entire Cohorts 2 (n = 58) and 3 (n = 68). Participants completed the same survey at the start and end of term, with different free-text items. Quantitative and qualitative responses were compared between groups. RESULTS: Student-reported agentic feedback behaviour increased across all outcomes except for feedback utilisation. Overall student satisfaction with feedback increased during the term in Cohorts 2 (23-65%, p = 0.002) and 3 (40-70%, p = 0.003) but not in Cohort 1 non-participating students (27-42%, p = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: A brief one-off student-directed feedback workshop may improve agentic student feedback behaviours (e.g. feedback-seeking) and student satisfaction with feedback.
BACKGROUND: The learner has a central role in feedback. We developed a feedback workshop for medical students grounded in two concepts: (1) Student agency in feedback and its interplay in the context of brief clinical attachments; (2) The educational alliance. AIMS: To determine whether a brief feedback training workshop prior to a series of two-week clinical attachments improves agentic student feedback behaviour (e.g. seeking, recognising, evaluating and utilising feedback) and student satisfaction with feedback. METHODS: We conducted surveys among three consecutive student cohorts undertaking three fortnightly paediatric clinical attachments. We pilot tested a workshop with Cohort 1 and implemented it for the entire Cohorts 2 (n = 58) and 3 (n = 68). Participants completed the same survey at the start and end of term, with different free-text items. Quantitative and qualitative responses were compared between groups. RESULTS: Student-reported agentic feedback behaviour increased across all outcomes except for feedback utilisation. Overall student satisfaction with feedback increased during the term in Cohorts 2 (23-65%, p = 0.002) and 3 (40-70%, p = 0.003) but not in Cohort 1 non-participating students (27-42%, p = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: A brief one-off student-directed feedback workshop may improve agentic student feedback behaviours (e.g. feedback-seeking) and student satisfaction with feedback.
Authors: Andrew Matthews; Matthew Hall; Jose M Parra; Margaret M Hayes; Christine P Beltran; Brittany L Ranchoff; Amy M Sullivan; Jeffrey H William Journal: Adv Med Educ Pract Date: 2020-11-12