Method: This is a mixed-method study. The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) was used to collect student SRL strategies while semi-structured interviews with faculty members and focus group discussions with students were used to gather data on the approaches that promote SRL. Student MSLQ was analysed using descriptive statistics while interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed.
Results: A pilot using MSLQ with 413 students recorded a Cronbach's alpha of 0.928 for the questionnaire. The actual study involved 457 Years 1 & 2 students. Students from both institutions are motivated by the Task Value, and they use Elaboration and Organisation strategies the most in their pre-clinical year. Three themes emerged from the qualitative analysis of this study: characteristics of strategies that promote SRL, hindrance in promoting SRL, and opportunities in promoting SRL.
Conclusions: Our findings indicate that students' intrinsic motivation is generally high in pre-clinical year. However, metacognition and critical thinking strategies will need to be enhanced among students. Despite knowing teaching and learning approaches could promote these strategies, many teachers are still not confident in doing so and hence training dang sharing best practices might be helpful in promoting SRL.
Method: A mixed-method study design, sequential exploratory approach was chosen to develop the instrument. Initial semi-structured interviews were conducted with 4 preceptors at the teaching hospitals. Five main themes emerged from the interviews. The themes were developed into a 23-item questionnaire. Nineteen Head or Assistant Head of clinical departments were asked to review the relevance of the content. The questionnaire was later sent out to 34 preceptors and 35 paramedic staffs to participate in the construct validity study by conducting exploratory factor analysis (EFA). SPSS version 21 software was used to analyze the data and Varimax rotation method was performed to simplify and describe the data structure.
Result: Review of the factor structures suggested that the most appropriate fit was 5 factors. Most of the questionnaire items were relevant to assess performance (4.65 + 0.15), except in item 4 of the clinical skill factor. The 23 items of the evaluation instruments showed that five factors were extracted which explained 73.9% of the variance between them. Construct validity was achieved after the instrument was run for an iteration of eight times, with Cronbach's alpha of 0.951.
Discussion: The instrument has achieved the desired content and construct validity score. It can be used by other institutions to assess their medical graduates' performance in the clinical setting.
METHOD: This was a qualitative study using brief, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews amongst delegates at a 3-day Asia Pacific regional academic primary care conference in Singapore. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and their contents analysed thematically.
RESULTS: Eighty-nine interviews were analysed. Respondents were mainly early career researchers (58%), and a third were presenting (poster or oral) at the conference. Many positive attributes of posters were identified. For the viewers, these included the ability to gain a rapid overview of research activity (for "benchmarking", "updating", and "inspiration"); the ability to choose who to engage with and when, in contrast to the tightly scheduled oral sessions; and opportunity to discuss content in a leisurely and detailed fashion with the presenter. Presenters considered posters "less threatening" than oral presentations and valued posters for the networking opportunities they created. However, posters were reported to be more demanding on the skills of précis and their preparation was considered arduous and more expensive than an oral presentation. Posters were also perceived to have lower academic status and dominate the presenter's time at the conference, reducing the opportunities for them to see the work of others. Suggestions for incorporating technologies to enhance the impact of posters included QR codes to access more detailed information, pre-recorded presentations, and online interactive clarification sessions with poster authors.
CONCLUSION: Posters are perceived as a valuable mode of presentation at scientific conferences by presenters and viewers. Their unique strengths challenge the perception that posters are somehow inferior to oral presentations, suggesting a need for their advantages to be promoted by researchers and conference organisers. The incorporation of technology within the traditional display may enhance poster utility. Given the time and money spent on academic conferences there is an urgent need to evaluate the different styles of presentation used at conferences and how they differ in their ability to impact on medical science knowledge and evidence-based clinical practice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-022-01657-z.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-023-01747-6.
METHODS: A qualitative study involving 20 preclinical medical students with learning experiences in SC was conducted between December 2019 and 2020 at a medical school in Malaysia. Semi-structured interview questions were developed based on Kolb's learning cycle. The data were thematically analysed using the six phases of Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Three main themes were identified based on preclinical medical students' experiences in SC; they were 'preparation for authentic clinical experience', 'accessibility of multiple resources for learning and support' and 'opportunities to learn and improve'.
CONCLUSIONS: The SC's resources have a significant and positive role in supporting preclinical medical students learn clinical and communication skills. The SC resources prepared them for authentic clinical experiences with a patient-centred care approach and self-directed learning opportunities. Social support from peers, peer tutors and academics emerged as a key finding and resource of the SC as they help preclinical students learn and improve.