Evaluating differently tutored groups in problem-based learning in a German dental curriculum: a mixed methods study

BMC Medical Education

Research Article

Andreas Moeltner¹  Susanne Gerhardt-Szep²  Stefan Rüttermann²  Miriam Hansen³  Anja Böckers⁴  Falk Ochsendorf⁵  Florian Kunkel⁶ 

[1] Competence Center for Assessment in Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 346, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany;Department of Operative Dentistry, Center for Dentistry and Oral Medicine (Carolinum), Medical Faculty, Goethe University of Frankfurt am Main, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Building 29, 60596, Frankfurt am Main, Germany;Institute of Psychology, Interdisziplinäres Kolleg Hochschuldidaktik (IKH), Goethe University of Frankfurt am Main, Senckenberganlage 15, 60325, Frankfurt am Main, Germany;Medical Faculty, Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology, University in Ulm, Albert-Einstein Allee 11, 89081, Ulm, Germany;Medical Faculty, Institute of Dermatology, Goethe University of Frankfurt am Main, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, Building 28, 60596, Frankfurt am Main, Germany;Private Practice, Bergerstraße 159, 60385, Frankfurt am Main, Germany;

关键词: Assessment;    Clinical tutor;    Curriculum;    Effectiveness;    Evaluation;    Faculty development;    Focus groups;    Knowledge;    Mixed methods research;    Problem-based learning;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0505-0

 received in 2014-09-29, accepted in 2015-12-07,  发布年份 2016

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundIt is still unclear to what extent the PBL tutor affects learning in PBL-sessions. This mixed-methods study (Part 1 and 2) evaluated the effects of facilitative (f) versus non-facilitative (nf) tutoring roles on knowledge-gain and group functioning in the field of endodontics.MethodsPart 1 was a quantitative assessment of tutor effectiveness within a prospective, experimental, single-blind, stratified, randomized, two-group intervention study. Participants attended PBL in the context of a hybrid curriculum. A validated questionnaire was used and knowledge assessments were conducted before and after the intervention. External observers rated tutor performance. Part 2 was a qualitative assessment of tutor effectiveness and consisted of semi-structured expert interviews with tutors and focus group discussions with students.ResultsPart 1: f tutors obtained significantly higher scores than nf tutors with respect to learning motivation and tutor effectiveness (p ≤ 0.05). nf tuition resulted in a slightly larger knowledge gain (p = 0.08). External observers documented a significantly higher activity among facilitative tutors compared to non-facilitative tutors.Part 2: Tutors found the f role easier although this led to a less autonomous working climate. The students rated f tutoring as positive in all cases.ConclusionsWith respect to PBL-group performance, students felt that groups guided in a non-facilitative fashion exhibited a higher level of independence and autonomy, especially with increasing PBL experience. In addition, students reported that more preparation was necessary for sessions guided by a non-facilitative tutor. Tutors were able to modify their role and influence group processes in a controlled manner. Results are useful for future “Train-the-Teacher” sessions.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© Gerhardt-Szep et al. 2016