Skip to main content

Two-Week Resident-As-Teacher Program May Improve Peer Feedback and Online Evaluation Completion

Abstract

Objectives

Many training programs have implemented Resident-as-Teacher curricula. Previous evaluations of such programs have largely focused on direct, often self-assessed benefits to the learner in the curriculum, without evaluating higher-level educational outcomes such as behavioral changes that benefit other trainees and the program as a whole.

Methods

We developed a 2-week Resident-as-Teacher (RaT) rotation, during which senior medicine residents lecture, lead morning report, teach exam maneuvers, and rehearse feedback skills, under direct faculty observation. We surveyed participating RaT residents, interns who worked with RaT residents, and interns who did not work with RaT residents, and we examined rates of program evaluation completion.

Results

All 42 Post Graduate Year 3 residents completed the rotation during the 2015–16 academic year, 26 (62%) during the study period. Of these 26 residents, 21 (81%) responded to the pre-rotation survey and 24 (92%) to the immediate post-rotation and 6-month follow-up surveys. RaT residents reported increased confidence in all teaching formats. Interns who worked with these residents were more satisfied with the feedback they received than their co-interns who did not (92 vs. 63%). Residents who completed the RaT rotation were more likely to fill out online evaluations (mean completion rate 82 vs. 69%).

Conclusions

Our 2-week intensive curriculum on teaching and feedback improved self-reported comfort with teaching and preparedness for careers in academic medicine. Moreover, our analysis suggests the intervention changed resident behaviors, improving the experience of other trainees and rates of online evaluation completion.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

References

  1. Jacobs MB, Tower D. Enhancing the training of internal medicine residents at Stanford by establishing a model group practice and raising its clinical educators’ status. Acad Med. 1992;67(10):623–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Adamson R, Goodman RB, Kritek P, Luks AM, Tonelli MR, Benditt J. Training the teachers. The clinician-educator track of the University of Washington Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine Fellowship Program. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015;12(4):480–5. https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.201501-032OT.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith CC, McCormick I, Huang GC. The clinician-educator track: training internal medicine residents as clinician-educators. Acad Med. 2014;89(6):888–91. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yedidia MJ, Schwartz MD, Hirschkorn C, Lipkin M Jr. Learners as teachers: the conflicting roles of medical residents. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10(11):615–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaufman DM. Applying educational theory in practice. BMJ. 2003;326(7382):213–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bowen JL. Educational strategies to promote clinical diagnostic reasoning. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(21):2217–25. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra054782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hill AG, Yu TC, Barrow M, Hattie J. A systematic review of resident-as-teacher programmes. Med Educ. 2009;43(12):1129–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03523.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bing-You RG, Trowbridge RL. Why medical educators may be failing at feedback. JAMA. 2009;302(12):1330–1. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kirkpatrick D, Kirkpatrick J. Evaluating training programs: the four levels. San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koehler; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wamsley MA, Julian KA, Wipf JE. A literature review of “resident-as-teacher” curricula: do teaching courses make a difference? J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19(5 Pt 2):574–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.30116.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ende J. Feedback in clinical medical education. JAMA. 1983;250(6):777–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pendleton D. The consultation: an approach to learning and teaching. Oxford general practice series, vol 6. Oxford Oxfordshire. New York: Oxford University Press; 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Barth RJ Jr, Rowland-Morin PA, Mott LA, Burchard KW. Communication effectiveness training improves surgical resident teaching ability. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185(6):516–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Archer JC. State of the science in health professional education: effective feedback. Med Educ. 2010;44(1):101–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03546.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Peccoralo L, Karani R, Coplit L, Korenstein D. Pocket card and dedicated feedback session to improve feedback to ward residents: a randomized trial. J Hosp Med. 2012;7(1):35–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhm.934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jackson JL, Kay C, Frank M. The validity and reliability of attending evaluations of medicine residents. SAGE Open Med. 2015;3:2050312115589648. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312115589648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Branch WT Jr, Paranjape A. Feedback and reflection: teaching methods for clinical settings. Acad Med. 2002;77(12 Pt 1):1185–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Van Rosendaal GM, Jennett PA. Comparing peer and faculty evaluations in an internal medicine residency. Acad Med. 1994;69(4):299–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dupras DM, Edson RS. A survey of resident opinions on peer evaluation in a large internal medicine residency program. J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3(2):138–43. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-10-00099.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. de la Cruz MS, Kopec MT, Wimsatt LA. Resident perceptions of giving and receiving peer-to-peer feedback. J Grad Med Educ. 2015;7(2):208–13. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-14-00388.1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Al Achkar M, Hanauer M, Morrison EH, Davies MK, Oh RC. Changing trends in residents-as-teachers across graduate medical education. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017;8:299–306. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S127007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the support and guidance of Beth Barron and Joseph Tenenbaum.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Arielle L Langer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Langer, A.L., Bernard, S. & Block, B.L. Two-Week Resident-As-Teacher Program May Improve Peer Feedback and Online Evaluation Completion. Med.Sci.Educ. 28, 633–637 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-018-0597-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-018-0597-3

Keywords

  • Resident-as-Teacher
  • Program evaluation
  • Feedback
  • Internal medicine residency