Measuring Faculty Skill and Effectiveness in Conducting Interactive Learning Sessions—a Proposed Instrument
- 259 Downloads
Medical educators have created approaches such as the “flipped classroom” to cultivate robust knowledge transfer with high-order thinking skills and retention. Hybrid approaches, with independent self-directed learning and large group interactive “application” activities, may also better foster learning. No standard instrument exists to rate the effectiveness of interactive teaching in large groups. This study developed an objective criterion-based instrument to measure the effectiveness of large group teaching by educators who engage with an audience that is pre-prepared by self-directed learning. We call such an educator a “Conductor of Interactive Learning” (COIL) and the interactive skillset, COIL skills. Based on needs assessment surveys of local and national end users, we designed a measurable standard-based instrument to evaluate effectiveness of a COIL. The instrument was designed to delineate measurable objective standards that characterize COIL skills and serve as a peer/self-assessment tool to identify individual COIL skills. After beta testing across institutional medical educators (n = 28), improved versions were presented to national experts (n = 12) and potential medical educator end users (three conference workshops) for constructive feedback on the quality and usefulness of the standards and the rating instrument. We developed standards that captured both interactive skills (n = 7) and non-interactive educational fundamentals (n = 9) for large group teaching. Using an iterative consensus building national process, we finalized a hybrid rating instrument consisting of these standards with anchors adjacent to merged 4-point Likert and visual analog scales. The standards and rating instrument for COIL skills could serve as an individualized guide for educator development.
KeywordsSelf-directed learning Interactive learning Higher-order learning
Thanks to the consultants at the Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine for the support and advice in the development of the COIL program: David Battinelli MD; Samara Ginzburg MD; and Lawrence Smith MD.
The following medical education research experts acted as consultants in the formulation of the COIL program for which we thank them very much: Elizabeth G Armstrong PhD, Director of Harvard Macy Institute; Lisa Coplit MD, Associate Dean for Assessment & Faculty, Frank H. Netter MD School of Medicine at Quinnipiac University; Susan Farrell MD EdM, Faculty of Harvard Macy Institute, Professor Harvard Medical School; Robert Milner PhD, University of Massachusetts Medical School; Lori R Newman EdM, Harvard Medical School; Klara K Papp PhD, Director of Assessment and Evaluations, Office of Curricular Affairs, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine; David Roberts MD, Harvard Medical School; Luanne E Thorndyke MD, Vice Provost of Faculty Affairs, University Massachusetts Med School. A particular thank you to Maryellen E Gusic MD who served as a major academic contributor to the COIL program since its conception at the 2012 Harvard Macy Institute.
- 9.Newman LR, Brodsky DD, Roberts DH, Pelletier SR, Johansson A, Vollmer Jr CM, Atkins KM, Schwartzstein RM. Developing expert-derived rating standards for the peer assessment of lectures. Acad Med. 2012;87:356–6.Google Scholar
- 13.Englbrecht M1, Tarner IH, van der Heijde DM, Manger B, Bombardier C, Müller-Ladner U. Measuring pain and efficacy of pain treatment in inflammatory arthritis: a systematic literature review. J Rheumatol Suppl. 2012; 90:3–10.Google Scholar
- 14.Dreyfus SE, Dreyfus HL. A five stage model of the mental activities involved in direct skill acquisition. Washington, DC: Storming Media; 1990.Google Scholar
- 16.Bloom BS [ed.], Engelhart MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR. Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: cognitive Domain. New York, David McKay. 1956.Google Scholar
- 17.Anderson, L. W. and Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds.). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon. Boston, MA (Pearson Education Group). 2001.Google Scholar