Advertisement

Simulation Education Theory

  • Les R. BeckerEmail author
  • Belinda A. Hermosura
Chapter
Part of the Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation book series (CHS)

Abstract

Simulation-based educational methods are recognized as an established component of medical training for medical students, residents, and fellows; have been shown to be low-cost and cost-effective; and most recently have been linked to convincingly improved training outcomes for high-risk, low-frequency obstetrical emergencies. This chapter offers an overview of educational theory supporting simulation-based education (SBE) methods.

The core components of experiential learning theory, concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation drive simulation-based learning through the learning styles of diverging, assimilating, converging, and accommodating as learners’ kinesthetic and cognitive skills grow in the simulation space. Judicious application of fidelity in its many dimensions provides a basis for faculty to scaffold the growth of their learners.

Simulation provides a substrate for deliberate practice, a component of mastery learning, leading to expert performance as healthcare professionals engage in lifelong learning. In this chapter, we provide an overview of these topics and their interrelationships.

Keywords

Simulation Experiential learning Fidelity Deliberate practice Mastery learning 

References

  1. 1.
    Deering S, Auguste T, Lockrow E. Obstetric simulation for medical student, resident, and fellow education. YSPER. 2013;37(3):143–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bruno CJ, Glass KM. Cost-effective and low-technology options for simulation and training in neonatology. YSPER. 2016;40(7):473–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fisher N, Bernstein PS, Satin A, Pardanani S, Heo H, Merkatz IR, et al. Resident training for eclampsia and magnesium toxicity management: simulation or traditional lecture? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;203(4):1–5.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kolb DA. Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1984.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kolb AY, Kolb DA. Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Acad Manag Learn Edu. 2005;4(2):193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kolb DA. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. 2nd ed. Pearson Education: Saddle River; 2015.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kolb DA. Management and the learning process. Calif Manag Rev. 1976;XVIII(3):21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dreyfus SE, Dreyfus HL. A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition. DTIC Document: Berkeley; 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dreyfus SE. The five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bull Sci Technol Soc. 2004;24(3):177–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ericsson KA. The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In: Ericsson KA, Charness N, Feltovich PJ, Hoffman RR, editors. The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2006. p. 683–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kolb DA. On management and the learning process. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1973.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piaget J. Development and learning. In: Gauvain M, Cole M, editors. Readings on the development of children, vol. 1997. New York: Scientific American Books; 1964. p. 19–28.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marrow AJ. The practical theorist: the life and work of Kurt Lewin, vol. 1969. New York: Basic Books; 1969.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lewin K. Resolving social confllicts & field theory in social science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2008 [1946].Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hampden-Turner CM. An existential “learning theory” and the integration of T-group research. J Appl Behav Sci. 1966;2(4):367–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bradford L, Gibb J, Benne K, editors. T-group theory and laboratory method: innovation in re-education. New York: Wiley; 1964.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dewey J. Education and experience. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1938.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kolb AY, Kolb DA. Learning styles and learning spaces: a review of the multidisciplinary application of experiential learning theory in higher education. In: Sims RR, Sims SJ, editors. Learning styles and learning. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.; 2006. p. 45–91.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arafeh JMR. Simulation-based training: the future of competency? J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2011;25(2):171–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Toofanny RD, Simms AM, Beck DA, Daggett V. Implementation of 3D spatial indexing and compression in a large-scale molecular dynamics simulation database for rapid atomic contact detection. BMC bioinformatics. 2011;12:234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cook T. The curves of life. London: Constable and Company; 1914.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mann K, Gordon J, MacLeod A. Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2009;14(4):595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hays RT. Simulator fidelity: a concept paper. DTIC Document; 1980.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hays RT. Research issues in the determination of simulator fidelity: proceedings of the ARI sponsored workshop 23–24 July, 1981.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rehmann AJ, Mitman RD, Reynolds MC. Federal aviation administration technical C. A handbook of flight simulation fidelity requirements for human factors research; 1995. 25 p.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alessi SM. Fidelity in the design of instructional simulations. J Comput-Based Ins. 1988;15:40–7.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alessi SM. Simulation design for training and assessment. Aircrew Train Assess. 2000;Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hays RT, Singer MJ. Simulation fidelity in training system design: bridging the gap between reality and training. New York: Springer; 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bradley P. The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med Educ. 2006;40(3):254–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Maran NJ, Glavin RJ. Low-to high-fidelity simulation–a continuum of medical education? Med Educ. 2003;37(s1):22–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Alinier G. A typology of educationally focused medical simulation tools. Med Teach. 2007;29(8):e243–50.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu D, Macchiarella N, Vincenzi D. Simulation fidelity. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2008. p. 61–73.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tun JK, Alinier G, Tang J. Redefining simulation fidelity for healthcare education. Simul Gaming. 2015;46(2):159–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Norman G, Dore K, Grierson L. The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Med Educ. 2012;46(7):636–47.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee KHK, Grantham H, Boyd R. Comparison of high- and low-fidelity mannequins for clinical performance assessment. Emerg Med Australas. 2008;20(6):508–14.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bredmose PP, Habig K, Davies G, Grier G, Lockey DJ. Scenario based outdoor simulation in pre-hospital trauma care using a simple mannequin model. Scandinavian. Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine. 2010;18(1):13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lapkin S, Levett-Jones T. A cost-utility analysis of medium vs. high-fidelity human patient simulation manikins in nursing education. J Clin Nurs. 2011;20(23–24):3543–52.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Levett-Jones T, Lapkin S, Hoffman K, Arthur C, Roche J. Examining the impact of high and medium fidelity simulation experiences on nursing students’ knowledge acquisition. Nurse Educ Pract. 2011;11(6):380–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Paige JB, Morin KH. Simulation Fidelity and cueing: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Simul Nurs. 2013;9(11):e481–e9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Cook D. Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Acad Med. 2014;89(3):387–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    van Merrienboer JJG, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions. Educ Psychol Rev. 2005;17(2):147–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Reedy GB. Using cognitive load theory to inform simulation design and practice. Clin Simul Nurs. 2015;11(8):355–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Burchard ER, Lockrow EG, Zahn CM, Dunlow SG, Satin AJ. Simulation training improves resident performance in operative hysteroscopic resection techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(5):542–e4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Holton D, Clarke D. Scaffolding and metacognition. Int J Math Educ Sci Technol. 2006;37(2):127–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Bruner JS. Organization of early skilled action. Child Dev. 1973;44(1):1–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Vygotsky L. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Oxford: Harvard University Press; 1978.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G. The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1976;17(2):89–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Barrows HS, Feltovich PJ. The clinical reasoning process. Med Educ. 1987;21(2):86–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Land SM, Hannafin MJ. Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: a qualitative study. Educ Technol Res Dev. 1997;45(2):47–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Saye JW, Brush T. Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2002;50(3):77–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Yelland N, Masters J. Rethinking scaffolding in the information age. Comput Educ. 2007;48(3):362–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Simons KD, Klein JD. The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instr Sci. 2007;35(1):41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sibley J, Parmelee DX. Knowledge is no longer enough: enhancing professional education with team-based learning. New Dir Teach Learn. 2008;2008(116):41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Parmelee DX, Hudes P. Team-based learning: a relevant strategy in health professionals’ education. Med Teach. 2012;34(5):411–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Tolsgaard MG, Kulasegaram KM, Ringsted CV. Collaborative learning of clinical skills in health professions education: the why, how, when and for whom. Med Educ. 2015;50(1):69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Borders LD, Eubanks S, Callanan N. Supervision of psychosocial skills in genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 2006;15(4):211–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hess A. Growth in supervision: stages of supervisee and supervisor development. In: Kaslow F, editor. Supervision and training: models, dilemnsa, and challenges. New York: The Hawoth, Inc.; 1986. p. 51–67.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Middelton LA, Peters KF, Helmbold EA. Programmed instruction: genetics and gene therapy: genes and inheritance. Cancer Nurs. 1997;20(2):129–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Read A, Donnai D. New clinical genetics. 3rd ed. Oxfordshire: Scion; 2015.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Venne VL, Coleman D. Training the Millennial learner through experiential evolutionary scaffolding: implications for clinical supervision in graduate education programs. J Genet Couns. 2010;19(6):554–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Van Lier L. Interaction in the language curriculum: awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. London: Longman; 1996.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Jonassen DH. Scaffolding diagnostic reasoning in case-based-learning environments. J Comput High Educ. 1996;8(1):48–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Hmelo C, Day R. Contextualized questioning to scaffold learning from simulations. Comput Educ. 1999;32(2):151–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Barrows HS. How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York: Springer Pub Co; 1985.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Choules AP. The use of elearning in medical education: a review of the current situation. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(978):212–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Wu B, Wang M, Johnson JM, Grotzer TA. Improving the learning of clinical reasoning through computer-based cognitive representation. Med Educ Online. 2014;19:25940.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lemheney AJ, Bond WF, Padon JC. Developing virtual reality simulations for office-based medical emergencies. J Virtual Worlds Res. 2016;9:1–18.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kizakevich P, Furberg R, Hubal R, editors. Virtual reality simulation for multicasualty triage training. Proceedings of the 2006 I/ …; 2006/01/01.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rawson RE, Dispensa ME, Goldstein RE, Nicholson KW, Vidal NK. A simulation for teaching the basic and clinical science of fluid therapy. Adv Physiol Educ. 2009;33(3):202–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Nel PW. The use of an advanced simulation training facility to enhance clinical psychology trainees’ learning experiences. Psychol Learn Teach. 2010;9(2):65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Banerjee A, Slagle JM, Mercaldo ND, Booker R, Miller A, France DJ, et al. A simulation-based curriculum to introduce key teamwork principles to entering medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2016;16(1):295.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Papanagnou D. Telesimulation: a paradigm shift for simulation education. AEM Educ Train. 2017;1:137.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Römer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev. 1993;100(3):363–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: a general overview. Acad Emerg Med. 2008;15(11):988–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Ericsson KA. The scientific study of expert levels of performance: general implications for optimal learning and creativity1. High Abil Stud. 1998;9(1):75–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Fitts PM, Posner MI. Human performance. 1967.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Ericsson KA. Deliberate practice and the acquisition and maintenance of expert performance in medicine and related domains. Acad Med. 2004;79(10 Suppl):S70–81.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    McGaghie WC. Mastery learning. Acad Med. 2015;90(11):1438–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    McGaghie WC, Miller G, Sajid A, Tedler T. Competency-based curriculum development in medical education. An introduction. Public health papers no. 68. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1978. 96 p.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Wayne DB, Butter J, Siddall VJ, Fudala MJ, Wade LD, Feinglass J, et al. Mastery learning of advanced cardiac life support skills by internal medicine residents using simulation technology and deliberate practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21(3):251–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Wayne DB, Barsuk JH, O’Leary KJ, Fudala MJ, McGaghie WC. Mastery learning of thoracentesis skills by internal medicine residents using simulation technology and deliberate practice. J Hosp Med. 2008;3(1):48–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Barsuk JH, Ahya SN, Cohen ER, McGaghie WC, Wayne DB. Mastery learning of temporary hemodialysis catheter insertion by nephrology fellows using simulation technology and deliberate practice. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009;54(1):70–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Caprio T, McGaghie WC, Simuni T, Wayne DB. Simulation-based education with mastery learning improves residents’ lumbar puncture skills. Neurology. 2012;79(2):132–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Vozenilek JA, O’Connor LM, McGaghie WC, Wayne DB. Simulation-based education with mastery learning improves paracentesis skills. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4(1):23–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Mikolajczak A, Seburn S, Slade M, Wayne DB. Simulation-based mastery learning improves central line maintenance skills of ICU nurses. J Nurs Adm. 2015;45(10):511–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Kessler DO, Auerbach M, Pusic M, Tunik MG, Foltin JC. A randomized trial of simulation-based deliberate practice for infant lumbar puncture skills. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(4):197–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Sawyer T, Sierocka-Castaneda A, Chan D, Berg B, Lustik M, Thompson M. Deliberate practice using simulation improves neonatal resuscitation performance. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(6):327–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Barry JS, Gibbs MD, Rosenberg AA. A delivery room-focused education and deliberate practice can improve pediatric resident resuscitation training. J Perinatol. 2012;32(12):920–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Cordero L, Hart BJ, Hardin R, Mahan JD, Nankervis CA. Deliberate practice improves pediatric residents’ skills and team behaviors during simulated neonatal resuscitation. Clin Pediatr. 2013;52(8):747–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Marcus H, Vakharia V, Kirkman MA, Murphy M, Nandi D. Practice makes perfect? The role of simulation-based deliberate practice and script-based mental rehearsal in the acquisition and maintenance of operative neurosurgical skills. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(Suppl 1):124–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Palter VN, Grantcharov TP. Individualized deliberate practice on a virtual reality simulator improves technical performance of surgical novices in the operating room: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2014;259(3):443–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Ahn J, Yashar MD, Novack J, Davidson J, Lapin B, Ocampo J, et al. Mastery learning of video laryngoscopy using the Glidescope in the Emergency Department. Simul Healthc. 2016;11(5):309–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Chudnoff SG, Liu CS, Levie MD, Bernstein P, Banks EH. Efficacy of a novel educational curriculum using a simulation laboratory on resident performance of hysteroscopic sterilization. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(4):1521–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Rackow BW, Solnik MJ, Tu FF, Senapati S, Pozolo KE, Du H. Deliberate practice improves obstetrics and gynecology residents’ hysteroscopy skills. J Grad Med Educ. 2012;4(3):329–34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Barsuk JH, Cohen ER, Potts S, Demo H, Gupta S, Feinglass J, et al. Dissemination of a simulation-based mastery learning intervention reduces central line-associated bloodstream infections. Qual Saf Health Care. 2014;23(9):749–56.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Griswold S, Ponnuru S, Nishisaki A, Szyld D, Davenport M, Deutsch ES, et al. The emerging role of simulation education to achieve patient safety: translating deliberate practice and debriefing to save lives. Pediatr Clin N Am. 2012;59(6):1329–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Cohen ER, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. Medical education featuring mastery learning with deliberate practice can lead to better health for individuals and populations. Acad Med. 2011;86(11):e8–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    McGaghie WC, Issenberg SB, Barsuk JH, Wayne DB. A critical review of simulation-based mastery learning with translational outcomes. Med Educ. 2014;48(4):375–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Seropian MA. General concepts in full scale simulation: getting started. Anesth Analg. 2003;97(6):1695–705.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Allen J. Maintenance training simulator fidelity and individual difference in transfer of training. Hum Factors. 1986;28(5):497–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Rinalducci E. Characteristics of visual fidelity in the virtual environment. Presence Teleop Virt. 1996;5(3):330–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Gross D, Freemann R, editors. Measuring fidelity differentials in HLA simulations. Fall 1997 Simulation Interoperability Workshop; 1997.Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Kaiser M, Schroeder J. Flights of fancy: the art and sceince of flight simulation. In: Vidulich M, Tsang P, editors. Principles and practices of aviation psychology. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003. p. 435–71.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Dahl Y, Alsos OA, Svanæs D. Fidelity considerations for simulation-based usability assessments of mobile ICT for hospitals. Int J Hum Comput Interact. 2010;26(5):445–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Zhang B. How to consider simulation fidelity and validity for an engineering simulator. Flight simulation and technologies. Guidance, navigation, and control and co-located conferences. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 1993.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Roza M, Voogd J, Jense H, editors. Defining, specifying and developing fidelity referents. 2001 European simulation interooperability workshop. London; 2001.Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Hughes T, Rolek E, editors. Fidelity and validity: issues of human behavioral representation requirements development. 2003 Winter simulation conference. New Orleans; 2003.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Beaubien JM, Baker DP. The use of simulation for training teamwork skills in health care: how low can you go? Qual Saf Health Care. 2004;13(suppl 1):i51–i6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MedStar Health, Simulation Training and Education Lab (SiTEL)Washington, DCUSA
  2. 2.Department of Emergency MedicineGeorgetown University School of MedicineWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations