Article

Perceptions and attributions of third-year student struggles in clerkships: do students and clerkship directors agree?

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Stanford, California 94305, USA.
Academic Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.47). 11/2007; 82(10):970-8. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31814a4fd5
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To explore the congruence between students' and clerkship directors' perceptions and attributions of students' struggles during the transition to clerkships.
Focus groups and interviews were conducted with third- and fourth-year medical students and clerkship directors at 10 U.S. medical schools in 2005 and 2006. Schools were selected to represent diverse locations, sizes, and missions. Interviews and focus groups were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed thematically.
Students' struggles included understanding roles and responsibilities, adjusting to clinical cultures, performing clinical skills, learning the logistics of clinical settings, and encountering frequent changes in staff, settings, and content. Clerkship directors recognized students' struggles with roles and responsibilities, performing clinical skills, and adjusting to clinical cultures, but they also focused on students' difficulties applying knowledge to clinical reasoning and engaging in self-directed learning.
Clerkship directors and students recognize many challenges associated with learning and performing in the clerkships. Students' perspectives suggest that these challenges may be more complex than clerkship directors and clinical teachers realize and/or are capable of addressing. The areas in which clerkship directors' and students' perspectives are not congruent point to directions for future research that can guide curricula and teaching strategies.

Full-text

Available from: Bridget C O'Brien, May 09, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
94 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Hidden curriculum literature suggests that different learning environments and curricular designs reinforce disparate values and behaviors. Aim: This study explores potential differences in learning environments afforded by two clerkship models through perceptions of the ideal student. Methods: In this qualitative study, research assistants interviewed 48 third-year students and 26 clinical supervisors from three US medical schools. Students and supervisors participated in longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) or block clerkships. Students and supervisors described the ideal student in their clerkship. Using phenomenographic techniques, authors identified five ideal student profiles and coded students’ and supervisors’ descriptions for alignment with one or more profiles. Results: Most students in both models described an ideal student who matched a learner profile (proactive and self-directed). More LIC students described an ideal student who fit a caregiver profile (engaging with and advocating for patients) and more block students described performer (appearing knowledgeable and competent) and team-player (working well with others) profiles. Supervisors’ descriptions paralleled students’ descriptions but with less emphasis on caregiving. Conclusions: Ideal student descriptions in LIC and block models may reflect different learning experiences and values emphasized in each model. These findings suggest implications for students’ construction of professional identities that warrant further exploration.
    Medical Teacher 04/2015; · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hidden curriculum literature suggests that different learning environments and curricular designs reinforce disparate values and behaviors. This study explores potential differences in learning environments afforded by two clerkship models through perceptions of the ideal student. In this qualitative study, research assistants interviewed 48 third-year students and 26 clinical supervisors from three US medical schools. Students and supervisors participated in longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) or block clerkships. Students and supervisors described the ideal student in their clerkship. Using phenomenographic techniques, authors identified five ideal student profiles and coded students' and supervisors' descriptions for alignment with one or more profiles. Most students in both models described an ideal student who matched a learner profile (proactive and self-directed). More LIC students described an ideal student who fit a caregiver profile (engaging with and advocating for patients) and more block students described performer (appearing knowledgeable and competent) and team-player (working well with others) profiles. Supervisors' descriptions paralleled students' descriptions but with less emphasis on caregiving. Ideal student descriptions in LIC and block models may reflect different learning experiences and values emphasized in each model. These findings suggest implications for students' construction of professional identities that warrant further exploration.
    Medical Teacher 04/2015; DOI:10.3109/0142159X.2015.1033390 · 2.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A personal learning plan (PLP) is an approach to assist medical students maximise their learning experience within clinical rotations. The aim of this study was to investigate whether medical students who created a PLP supported by an induction meeting had an improved academic performance within an undergraduate clinical rotation. A cluster randomised controlled study was conducted over a full academic year (2012/13). The intervention was the creation of a PLP by medical students supported by an individual 'one-to-one' induction meeting between each student and a faculty member. Randomisation was by unit of rotation in which students completed the program. There were 2 clusters in the intervention group (n = 71 students) and 2 clusters in the control group (n = 72 students). Primary outcome was the overall examination score. Secondary outcomes were student attendance and student evaluation. There was no difference in overall examination score between the intervention group and control group (mean score 56.3 ± 4.8% versus 56.7 ± 5.6%, p = 0.64). The majority of students in the intervention group (n = 51/71, 85%) reported that the PLP and induction meeting enhanced their learning experience. Attendance at the induction meeting was identified as a key element. The creation of a PLP supported by an induction meeting was rated highly by students as an approach to enhance their learning experience but did not result in an improved academic performance. Further research is required to establish the role of an interim or exit meeting.
    BMC Medical Education 12/2015; 15(1):325. DOI:10.1186/s12909-015-0325-2 · 1.41 Impact Factor