Andragogy in Practice: Applying a Theoretical Framework to Team Science Training in Biomedical Research

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY British Journal of Biomedical Science Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.3389/bjbs.2024.12651
Jacqueline M. Knapke, Laura Hildreth, Jennifer Molano, S. Schuckman, Jason T. Blackard, Megan Johnstone, Elizabeth Kopras, M. K. Lamkin, Rebecca C. Lee, John Kues, Angela Mendell
{"title":"Andragogy in Practice: Applying a Theoretical Framework to Team Science Training in Biomedical Research","authors":"Jacqueline M. Knapke, Laura Hildreth, Jennifer Molano, S. Schuckman, Jason T. Blackard, Megan Johnstone, Elizabeth Kopras, M. K. Lamkin, Rebecca C. Lee, John Kues, Angela Mendell","doi":"10.3389/bjbs.2024.12651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study is the first to apply the theoretical principles of Malcolm Knowles’ theory of andragogy to evaluate data collected from learners who participated in team science training workshops in a biomedical research setting. Briefly, andragogy includes six principles: the learner’s self-concept, the role of experience, readiness to learn, orientation to learning, the learner’s need to know, and intrinsic motivation. Using an embedded study design, the primary focus was on qualitative data, with quantitative data complementing the qualitative findings. The deductive analysis demonstrated that approximately 85% of the qualitative data could be connected to at least one andragogical principle. Participant responses to positive evaluation questions were largely related to two principles: readiness to learn and problem-based learning orientation. Participant responses to negative questions were largely connected to two different principles: the role of experience and self-direction. Inductive analysis found an additional theme: meeting biological needs. Quantitative survey results supported the qualitative findings. The study findings demonstrate that andragogy can serve as a valuable construct to integrate into the development of effective team science training for biomedical researchers.","PeriodicalId":9236,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Biomedical Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Biomedical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.12651","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study is the first to apply the theoretical principles of Malcolm Knowles’ theory of andragogy to evaluate data collected from learners who participated in team science training workshops in a biomedical research setting. Briefly, andragogy includes six principles: the learner’s self-concept, the role of experience, readiness to learn, orientation to learning, the learner’s need to know, and intrinsic motivation. Using an embedded study design, the primary focus was on qualitative data, with quantitative data complementing the qualitative findings. The deductive analysis demonstrated that approximately 85% of the qualitative data could be connected to at least one andragogical principle. Participant responses to positive evaluation questions were largely related to two principles: readiness to learn and problem-based learning orientation. Participant responses to negative questions were largely connected to two different principles: the role of experience and self-direction. Inductive analysis found an additional theme: meeting biological needs. Quantitative survey results supported the qualitative findings. The study findings demonstrate that andragogy can serve as a valuable construct to integrate into the development of effective team science training for biomedical researchers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实践中的教育学:将理论框架应用于生物医学研究中的团队科学培训
本研究首次应用马尔科姆-诺尔斯(Malcolm Knowles)的教学法理论原则,对在生物医学研究环境中参加团队科学培训研讨会的学习者收集的数据进行评估。简而言之,教学法包括六项原则:学习者的自我概念、经验的作用、学习准备、学习导向、学习者的求知需要和内在动机。采用嵌入式研究设计,主要关注定性数据,定量数据对定性结果进行补充。演绎分析表明,大约 85% 的定性数据可以与至少一个教学法原则联系起来。参与者对正面评价问题的回答主要与两个原则有关:学习准备和基于问题的学习导向。学员对负面问题的回答主要与两个不同的原则有关:经验的作用和自我导向。归纳分析发现了另一个主题:满足生理需求。定量调查结果支持定性调查结果。研究结果表明,"教学法 "可以作为一种有价值的构建方法,用于为生物医学研究人员开展有效的团队科学培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Biomedical Science
British Journal of Biomedical Science 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.80%
发文量
29
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Biomedical Science is committed to publishing high quality original research that represents a clear advance in the practice of biomedical science, and reviews that summarise recent advances in the field of biomedical science. The overall aim of the Journal is to provide a platform for the dissemination of new and innovative information on the diagnosis and management of disease that is valuable to the practicing laboratory scientist.
期刊最新文献
Improving Biomedical Science Literacy and Patient-Directed Knowledge of Tuberculosis (TB): A Cross-Sectional Infodemiology Study Examining Readability of Patient-Facing TB Information. Mesoporous Silica Microparticle-Protein Complexes: Effects of Protein Size and Solvent Properties on Diffusion and Loading Efficiency. Neuronal Vulnerability of the Entorhinal Cortex to Tau Pathology in Alzheimer's Disease. Evaluating Lung Changes in Long COVID: Ultra-Low-Dose vs. Standard-Dose CT Chest. Editorial: Advances in Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1