| Literature DB >> 35387641 |
A Homberg1, S Ziegler2, C Mahler3, J H Schultz4, S Loukanova2, J Hundertmark2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Peer-led tutorials are widely used in medical education to promote practical skills acquisition and support faculty staff. Typically, student tutors are custom trained for this specific task. We investigated whether opening up an existing medical tutor qualification program to other degree programs is successful in terms of acceptance among students, acquisition of tutor-specific and interprofessional competencies, and which factors contribute to success or failure.Entities:
Keywords: Interprofessional education; Peer teaching; Peer-assisted learning; Tutor qualification; Undergraduate education
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35387641 PMCID: PMC8988397 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-022-03304-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Fig. 1Development process and competencies of the interprofessional tutor qualification program
Schedule of the interprofessional tutor qualification program
| Schedule | Components | Teaching methods |
|---|---|---|
| First day: Didactics/teaching methods | ||
| 40 min | Getting to know and learn about each other | Sociometric formation, speed dating |
| 20 min | Expectations | Table group and plenum session |
| 60 min | Tasks and roles of a tutor | Table group and plenum session |
| 30 min | Basics of learning, teaching and didactics [ | Lectures |
| 90 min | Design of entry and exit phases of tutorials | Role play |
| 60 min | Motivation of participants, experiences of current tutors | Plenum discussion with experienced tutors |
| Second day: Group leadership | ||
| 60 min | Previous experience with groups and leadership | Circle of chairs, exchange, reflection |
| 30 min | Perception exercises | Moving exercise |
| 60 min | Rank dynamics, team roles and group phases [ | Theoretical input and role play |
| 30 min | Group leadership and leadership styles [ | Small working group and plenum session |
| 90 min | Dealing with resistance and disruptive factors, theme-centred interaction (TCI) [ | Theoretical input, working on case studies in small working groups |
| 30 min | Summary, outlook, evaluation | Plenum |
In 2020 we added an input on online learning at the beginning of the second day, replaced the role play on group phases and team roles with team-building games and did more outdoor exercises due to the pandemic situation
Participants’ socio-demographic characteristics and cohort composition
| Medical students | HCS | |
|---|---|---|
| Training participants | 77 | 22 |
| Per cohort | ||
| 2016 | 16 | 5 |
| 2017 | 15 | 4 |
| 2018 | 14 | 2 |
| 2019 | 10 | 9 |
| 2020 | 22 | 2 |
| Questionnaires completed | 75 | 22 |
| Gender | ||
| Number of responses a | 73 | 22 |
| Male | 34 | 2 |
| Female | 39 | 20 |
| Age | ||
| Number of responses a | 74 | 20 |
| Mean | 22.2 | 25.2 |
| Range | 19-31 | 21-38 |
| Semester | ||
| Number of responses a | 74 | 20 |
| Mean | 5.1 | 5.9 |
| Range | 3-12 | 3-9 |
HCS Healthcare students
aVarying sample size due to missing values
Fig. 2Attitudes toward interprofessional education. Medical students: n = 72; HCS (healthcare students): n = 21
Assessment of the interprofessional setting
| 1 | Likert scale 2 | 3 | n | mean | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medical students | 51 (71%) | 17 (24%) | 4 (6%) | 72 | 1.35 | 0.46 |
| HCS | 15 (71%) | 6 (29%) | - | 21 | 1.29 | 0.46 |
| Total | 66 (71%) | 23 (25%) | 4 (4%) | 93 | 1.33 | 0.56 |
Request: I consider the learning with other professions as successful. Five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree)
HCS Healthcare students
Competency acquisition
| Medical students | HCS | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | mean | SD | n | mean | SD | |||
| I know the characteristics of the tutor’s role. | 75 | 1.20 | 0.43 | 22 | 1.18 | 0.39 | 819.0 | .939 |
| I am able to flesh out pre-structured tutorials. | 75 | 1.75 | 0.66 | 22 | 1.95 | 0.95 | 753.5 | .500 |
| I am able to independently design tutorials entry and exit phases. | 75 | 1,.4 | 0.55 | 22 | 1.23 | 0.53 | 645.5 | .065 |
| I am familiar with different mediation techniques and methods. | 75 | 1.59 | 0.74 | 22 | 1.68 | 0.84 | 782.0 | .680 |
| I am able to recognize group dynamic processes. | 75 | 1.51 | 0.62 | 22 | 1.41 | 0.50 | 777.0 | .199 |
| I am able to influence and control group dynamic processes. | 74 | 2.00 | 0.64 | 21 | 2.24 | 0.70 | 651.5 | .636 |
| I am able to respond appropriately to participants’ different role behaviours. | 75 | 1.89 | 0.67 | 22 | 2.05 | 0.65 | 735.5 | .373 |
| I identify with the tutor role. | 75 | 1.24 | 0.49 | 22 | 1.50 | 0.74 | 685.0 | .109 |
Assessment of design, interaction, teaching methods and students’ satisfaction
| Medical students | HCS | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | mean | SD | n | mean | SD | |||
| The overall concept of the training was clear. | 75 | 1.37 | 0.56 | 22 | 1.09 | 0.29 | 622.0 | .025 |
| The trainers responded to participants’ questions and discussions. | 75 | 1.04 | 0.20 | 22 | 1.09 | 0.43 | 819.0 | .881 |
| Fears and uncertainties were adequately addressed. | 75 | 1.19 | 0.46 | 22 | 1.36 | 0.49 | 665.0 | .050 |
| Feedback was appropriate and constructive. | 75 | 1.37 | 0.67 | 22 | 1.45 | 0.80 | 791.5 | .716 |
| The teamwork was based on partnership and goals. | 75 | 1.15 | 0.36 | 22 | 1.09 | 0.29 | 779.0 | .502 |
| I was able to contribute my ideas during the learning process. | 75 | 1.35 | 0.60 | 22 | 1.59 | 0.96 | 720.0 | .268 |
| The lecturers were good role-models for interprofessional cooperation. | 75 | 1.16 | 0.44 | 22 | 1.32 | 0.65 | 742.5 | .258 |
| Attending the training was worthwhile. | 75 | 1.41 | 0.70 | 22 | 1.50 | 0.86 | 803.5 | .820 |
| Learning with other professions was advantageous. | 72 | 1.35 | 0.59 | 21 | 1.29 | 0.62 | 739.5 | .848 |
| Overall, I give the tutor training program the following gradea | 74 | 1.31 | 0.49 | 21 | 1.33 | 0.58 | 776.0 | .991 |
Five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree)
HCS Healthcare students, U Test statistic for Mann-Whitney tests
aFive-point Likert scale (1 = very good, 5 = poor)
Categorized content of free-text feedback
| Categories | Feedback on what should remain part of the training | Feedback on what should be improved |
|---|---|---|
| Practical exercises and role plays in tutorials | ||
| role plays evaluated positively (44) | more role play opportunities (8) clearer description of the task (7) additional topics to be thought of in the exercise tutorials (4) general dissatisfaction with role play (2) | |
| Interactive games | ||
diverse icebreakers (e.g. sociometric, speed dating) (17) team-building games (6)a | include more methods (4) provide more activating methods to motivate participants (2) | |
| Temporary division into small working groups | ||
| small group work evaluated positively (12) | working group composition should be remixed more often during course time (3) shorten the sharing of experiences and working group results (2) | |
| Specific concepts and topics | ||
group dynamics and group roles (12) theme-centred interaction (Cohn) and analysis of challenging situations (11) basics of teaching and learning (6) leadership styles (6) | dive deeper into teaching and learning theory (3) | |
| Balanced and entertaining | ||
methodological diversity and variety (13) interactive format (6) balanced relationship and connection between theory and practice (5) | provide less theoretical input (5) present theories in a more condensed and gripping way (4) provide more input (4) more exercises to practice the theories (3) too much content in general (2) | |
| Interprofessionality and group characteristics | ||
positive atmosphere and pleasant interaction (6) group composition and interprofessionality (5) | some content should be more specific to my studies (2) | |
| Trainer-trainee-interaction | ||
learner centred approach and individual feedback (7) support of multiple trainers (2) | feedback and reflection mentality too pronounced (10) criticized teaching styles of specific trainers (2) | |
| Structure and design of the training | ||
clear structure (3) appropriate visual aids (3) | breaks management (15) time management (10) time of the training (afternoon blocks) not appropriate (5) shorten the training (4) less demanding content at the end (4) provide more written material (4) schedule and objectives should be provided in the beginning (2) | |
everything was fine (6) consultation hour with experienced tutors (2) training for online teaching (2)a | more involvement of experienced tutors (2) more outdoor exercises (2) | |
n number of participants who referred to the category; in parentheses: number of mentions
aPart of the program since the 5th cohort; aspects mentioned only once are not included in the table