Learning oral presentation skills
- 420 Downloads
OBJECTIVE: Oral presentation skills are central to physicianphysician communication; however, little is known about how these skills are learned. Rhetoric is a social science which studies communication in terms of context and explores the action of language on knowledge, attitudes, and values. It has not previously been applied to medical discourse. We used rhetorical principles to qualitatively study how students learn oral presentation skills and what professional values are communicated in this process.
DESIGN: Descriptive study.
SETTING: Inpatient general medicine service in a university-affiliated public hospital.
PARTICIPANTS: Twelve third-year medical students during their internal medicine clerkship and 14 teachers.
MEASUREMENTS: One-hundred sixty hours of ethnographic observation, including 73 oral presentations on rounds. Discourse-based interviews of 8 students and 10 teachers. Data were quanlitatively analyzed to uncover recurrent patterns of communication.
MAIN RESULTS: Students and teachers had different perceptions of the purpose of oral presentation, and this was reflected in performance. Students described and conducted the presentation as a rule-based, data-storage activity governed by “order” and “structure.” Teachers approached the presentation as a flexible means of “communication” and a method for “constructing” the details of a case into a diagnostic or therapeutic plan. Although most teachers viewed oral presentations rhetorically (sensitive to context), most feedback that students received was implicit and acontextual, with little guidance provided for determining relevant content. This led to dysfunctional generalizations by students, sometimes resulting in worse communication skills (e.g., comment “be brief” resulted in reading faster rather than editing) and unintended value acquisition (e.g., request for less social history interpreted as social history never relevant).
CONCLUSION: Students learn oral presentation by trial and error rather than through teaching of an explicit rhetorical model. This may delay development of effective communication skills and result in acquisition of unintended professional values. Teaching and learning of oral presentation skills may be improved by emphasizing that context determines content and by making explicit the tacit rules of presentation.
Key Wordsmedical education professional communication feeback language socialization social sciences
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Lipkin M Jr, Putnam SM, Lazare A, eds. The Medical Interview: Clinical Care, Education and Research. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1995.Google Scholar
- 2.Atkinson P. Constructing Cases. Medical Talk, Medical Work: The Liturgy of the Clinic. London: Sage Publications; 1995:107–25.Google Scholar
- 3.Hunter KM. Doctors’ Stories: The narrative Structure of Medical Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1991.Google Scholar
- 4.Pomerantz AM, Ende J, Erickson F. Precepting conversations in a general medicine clinic. In: Morris GH, Chenail R, eds. The Talk of the Clinic: Explorations in the Analysis of Medical and Therapeutic Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates; 1995:151–69.Google Scholar
- 5.Arluke A. Social control rituals in medicine: the case of death rounds. In: Dingwall R, Heath C, Reid M, Stacey M, eds. Health Care and Health Knowledge. London: Croom Helm; 1977:107–25.Google Scholar
- 10.Winsor D. Writing like an engineer: a rhetorical education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates; 1996.Google Scholar
- 11.Yates J. Control Through Communication: The Rise of System in American Management. Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1989.Google Scholar
- 12.Bazerman C. Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Activity in Science. Madison, Wis: University of Wisconsin Press; 1988.Google Scholar
- 13.Pare A. Discourse regulations and the production of knowledge. In: Spilka R, ed. Writing in the Workplace: New Research Perspectives. Carbondale, Ill: Southern Illinois University Press; 1993:124–40.Google Scholar
- 14.Hammersly M, Atkinson Paul. Ethnography: Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 1995.Google Scholar
- 15.Glaser B, Strauss A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company; 1967.Google Scholar
- 17.Odell L, Goswami D, Herrington A. The discourse-based interview: a procedure for exploring the tacit knowledge of writers in nonacademic settings. In: Odell L, Goswami D, eds. Writing in Nonacademic Settings. New York: Guilford Press, 1985:221–36.Google Scholar
- 24.Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1986.Google Scholar
- 27.Konner M. Becoming a Doctor: A Journey of Initiation in Medical School. New York, NY: Penguin; 1987.Google Scholar
- 28.Stein H. American Medicine as Culture. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press; 1990.Google Scholar
- 30.Giltrow J, Valiquette M. Genres and knowledge: students writing in the disciplines. In: Freedman A, Medway P, eds. Teaching and Learning Genre. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook; 1994.Google Scholar
- 31.Schon DA. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books; 1983.Google Scholar
- 32.Freedman A. Do as I say: the relationship between teaching and learning new genres. In: Freedman A, Medway P, eds. Genre and the New Rhetoric. London: Taylor and Francis; 1994:191–210.Google Scholar
- 33.Coe RM. An arousing and fulfillment of desires: the rhetoric of genre in the process era-and beyond. In: Freedman A, Medway P, eds. Genre and the New Rhetoric. London: Taylor and Francis; 1994:181–90.Google Scholar
- 34.Coe RM. Process, form and substance: a rhetoric for advanced writers. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1990.Google Scholar