Fostering collaboration in simulations: How advanced learners benefit from collaboration scripts and reflection

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101912
Constanze Richters , Matthias Stadler , Anika Radkowitsch , Felix Behrmann , Marc Weidenbusch , Martin R. Fischer , Ralf Schmidmaier , Frank Fischer
{"title":"Fostering collaboration in simulations: How advanced learners benefit from collaboration scripts and reflection","authors":"Constanze Richters ,&nbsp;Matthias Stadler ,&nbsp;Anika Radkowitsch ,&nbsp;Felix Behrmann ,&nbsp;Marc Weidenbusch ,&nbsp;Martin R. Fischer ,&nbsp;Ralf Schmidmaier ,&nbsp;Frank Fischer","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Individual reflection and interdisciplinary collaboration can be critical for high-quality diagnostic outcomes. However, empirical findings on using instructional approaches to facilitate reflection and collaboration in collaborative diagnostic reasoning are inconclusive and limited. Previous studies on structured reflection and collaboration scripts have failed to consider learners’ prior knowledge, but the benefits of different types of instructional support, which offer varying levels of external guidance, tend to differ across prior knowledge levels.</p></div><div><h3>Aims</h3><p>We aim to investigate individual and synergistic effects of structured reflection and collaboration scripts on collaborative diagnostic reasoning while considering knowledge in a simulation and to explore how individual reflection and collaborative engagement contribute to diagnostic outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Sample</h3><p>Participants were 151 advanced medical students.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Participants received structured reflection, collaboration scripts, both, or no support while diagnosing fictitious patient cases with an agent-based radiologist.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Structured reflection improved collaborative diagnostic reasoning performance for learners with extensive prior knowledge but impeded performance for learners with little prior knowledge. The opposite was found for collaboration scripts. <span>Furthermore</span>, learners with extensive prior knowledge benefited more from a combination of both kinds of support than learners with little prior knowledge. Whereas no main effect of instructional support on the diagnostic outcome was found, simply working with the collaborator had a positive effect.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Different types of instructional support in simulations are differentially effective for learners with little and extensive prior knowledge. Extensive knowledge is needed for effective learning through reflection. But for high-quality diagnostic outcomes in simulated collaborative settings, collaborative engagement is more important than individual reflection.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 101912"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224000392","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Individual reflection and interdisciplinary collaboration can be critical for high-quality diagnostic outcomes. However, empirical findings on using instructional approaches to facilitate reflection and collaboration in collaborative diagnostic reasoning are inconclusive and limited. Previous studies on structured reflection and collaboration scripts have failed to consider learners’ prior knowledge, but the benefits of different types of instructional support, which offer varying levels of external guidance, tend to differ across prior knowledge levels.

Aims

We aim to investigate individual and synergistic effects of structured reflection and collaboration scripts on collaborative diagnostic reasoning while considering knowledge in a simulation and to explore how individual reflection and collaborative engagement contribute to diagnostic outcomes.

Sample

Participants were 151 advanced medical students.

Methods

Participants received structured reflection, collaboration scripts, both, or no support while diagnosing fictitious patient cases with an agent-based radiologist.

Results

Structured reflection improved collaborative diagnostic reasoning performance for learners with extensive prior knowledge but impeded performance for learners with little prior knowledge. The opposite was found for collaboration scripts. Furthermore, learners with extensive prior knowledge benefited more from a combination of both kinds of support than learners with little prior knowledge. Whereas no main effect of instructional support on the diagnostic outcome was found, simply working with the collaborator had a positive effect.

Conclusions

Different types of instructional support in simulations are differentially effective for learners with little and extensive prior knowledge. Extensive knowledge is needed for effective learning through reflection. But for high-quality diagnostic outcomes in simulated collaborative settings, collaborative engagement is more important than individual reflection.

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
在模拟中促进协作:高级学习者如何从协作脚本和反思中受益
背景个人反思和跨学科合作对高质量的诊断结果至关重要。然而,关于在协作诊断推理中使用教学方法促进反思和协作的实证研究结果既不确定也很有限。目的我们旨在研究结构化反思和协作脚本对协作诊断推理的个体效应和协同效应,同时考虑模拟中的知识,并探索个体反思和协作参与如何促进诊断结果。方法参与者在与基于代理的放射科医生一起诊断虚构的病人病例时,接受结构化反思、协作脚本、两者都接受或不接受支持。结果结构化反思提高了先前知识丰富的学习者的协作诊断推理成绩,但阻碍了先前知识贫乏的学习者的成绩。协作脚本的情况则恰恰相反。此外,与先验知识较少的学习者相比,先验知识丰富的学习者从两种支持的结合中获益更多。虽然没有发现教学支持对诊断结果的主效应,但仅仅与合作者合作就会产生积极效应。通过反思进行有效学习需要丰富的知识。但要在模拟合作环境中获得高质量的诊断结果,合作参与比个人反思更重要。
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
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
期刊最新文献
Competitive and non-competitive school climate and students’ well-being Comparison effects on self- and external ratings: Testing the generalizability of the 2I/E model to parents and teachers of academic track school students Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort Metacognitive scaffolding for digital reading and mind-wandering in adults with and without ADHD Retrieval supports word learning in children with Down syndrome
×
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