Leora Branfield Day, Deborah Butler, Ayelet Kuper, Rupal Shah, Lynfa Stroud, Shiphra Ginsburg, Walter Tavares, Ryan Brydges
{"title":"(在以能力为基础的培训中,住院医师和辅导员共同调节学习的(错误)一致性。","authors":"Leora Branfield Day, Deborah Butler, Ayelet Kuper, Rupal Shah, Lynfa Stroud, Shiphra Ginsburg, Walter Tavares, Ryan Brydges","doi":"10.1111/medu.15549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>In implementing competence-based medical education (CBME), some Canadian residency programmes recruit clinicians to function as Academic Advisors (AAs). AAs are expected to help monitor residents' progress, coach them longitudinally, and serve as sources of co-regulated learning (Co-RL) to support their developing self-regulated learning (SRL) abilities. Implementing the AA role is optional, meaning each residency programme must decide whether and how to implement it, which could generate uncertainty and heterogeneity in how effectively AAs will \"monitor and advise\" residents. We sought to clarify how AA-resident dyads collaboratively interpret assessment data from multiple sources, co-create learning goals and action plans and attempt to enhance residents' SRL skills.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Shortly after each of their six meetings during two years of Internal Medicine residency, we conducted individual, brief interviews with AAs (N = 10) and residents (N = 10). We analysed transcripts using an abductive framework with theory-based and evidence-based sensitizing concepts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collected 49 residents and 36 AA 'meeting debriefs', which produced rich data on how dyads variably engaged in SRL and Co-RL. Residents and AAs adopted \"learning stances\" that oriented their perceptions and approaches to Co-RL. Their stances did not always align within dyads. We found unique patterns in how stances evolved or devolved over time, and in how these changes impacted dyads' Co-RL processes. While some dyads evolved to engage in proactive co-regulation, most stayed consistent or oscillated reactively in their relationships, with little apparent Co-RL focused on helping residents to develop clinical competencies through SRL. We catalogued multiple influential sources of regulation of learning.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The conceptually ideal form of Co-RL was not consistently achieved in this well-intended implementation of AA-resident dyads. To better translate 'coaching over time' from intention to practice, we recommend that residency programmes use Co-RL principles to refine CBME processes, including refining assessment tools, resident orientation sessions and faculty development practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":18370,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"(Mis)Alignment in resident and advisor co-regulated learning in competency-based training.\",\"authors\":\"Leora Branfield Day, Deborah Butler, Ayelet Kuper, Rupal Shah, Lynfa Stroud, Shiphra Ginsburg, Walter Tavares, Ryan Brydges\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/medu.15549\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background/objective: </strong>In implementing competence-based medical education (CBME), some Canadian residency programmes recruit clinicians to function as Academic Advisors (AAs). AAs are expected to help monitor residents' progress, coach them longitudinally, and serve as sources of co-regulated learning (Co-RL) to support their developing self-regulated learning (SRL) abilities. Implementing the AA role is optional, meaning each residency programme must decide whether and how to implement it, which could generate uncertainty and heterogeneity in how effectively AAs will \\\"monitor and advise\\\" residents. We sought to clarify how AA-resident dyads collaboratively interpret assessment data from multiple sources, co-create learning goals and action plans and attempt to enhance residents' SRL skills.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Shortly after each of their six meetings during two years of Internal Medicine residency, we conducted individual, brief interviews with AAs (N = 10) and residents (N = 10). We analysed transcripts using an abductive framework with theory-based and evidence-based sensitizing concepts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We collected 49 residents and 36 AA 'meeting debriefs', which produced rich data on how dyads variably engaged in SRL and Co-RL. Residents and AAs adopted \\\"learning stances\\\" that oriented their perceptions and approaches to Co-RL. Their stances did not always align within dyads. We found unique patterns in how stances evolved or devolved over time, and in how these changes impacted dyads' Co-RL processes. While some dyads evolved to engage in proactive co-regulation, most stayed consistent or oscillated reactively in their relationships, with little apparent Co-RL focused on helping residents to develop clinical competencies through SRL. We catalogued multiple influential sources of regulation of learning.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The conceptually ideal form of Co-RL was not consistently achieved in this well-intended implementation of AA-resident dyads. To better translate 'coaching over time' from intention to practice, we recommend that residency programmes use Co-RL principles to refine CBME processes, including refining assessment tools, resident orientation sessions and faculty development practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18370,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medical Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15549\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.15549","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
(Mis)Alignment in resident and advisor co-regulated learning in competency-based training.
Background/objective: In implementing competence-based medical education (CBME), some Canadian residency programmes recruit clinicians to function as Academic Advisors (AAs). AAs are expected to help monitor residents' progress, coach them longitudinally, and serve as sources of co-regulated learning (Co-RL) to support their developing self-regulated learning (SRL) abilities. Implementing the AA role is optional, meaning each residency programme must decide whether and how to implement it, which could generate uncertainty and heterogeneity in how effectively AAs will "monitor and advise" residents. We sought to clarify how AA-resident dyads collaboratively interpret assessment data from multiple sources, co-create learning goals and action plans and attempt to enhance residents' SRL skills.
Methods: Shortly after each of their six meetings during two years of Internal Medicine residency, we conducted individual, brief interviews with AAs (N = 10) and residents (N = 10). We analysed transcripts using an abductive framework with theory-based and evidence-based sensitizing concepts.
Results: We collected 49 residents and 36 AA 'meeting debriefs', which produced rich data on how dyads variably engaged in SRL and Co-RL. Residents and AAs adopted "learning stances" that oriented their perceptions and approaches to Co-RL. Their stances did not always align within dyads. We found unique patterns in how stances evolved or devolved over time, and in how these changes impacted dyads' Co-RL processes. While some dyads evolved to engage in proactive co-regulation, most stayed consistent or oscillated reactively in their relationships, with little apparent Co-RL focused on helping residents to develop clinical competencies through SRL. We catalogued multiple influential sources of regulation of learning.
Conclusion: The conceptually ideal form of Co-RL was not consistently achieved in this well-intended implementation of AA-resident dyads. To better translate 'coaching over time' from intention to practice, we recommend that residency programmes use Co-RL principles to refine CBME processes, including refining assessment tools, resident orientation sessions and faculty development practices.
期刊介绍:
Medical Education seeks to be the pre-eminent journal in the field of education for health care professionals, and publishes material of the highest quality, reflecting world wide or provocative issues and perspectives.
The journal welcomes high quality papers on all aspects of health professional education including;
-undergraduate education
-postgraduate training
-continuing professional development
-interprofessional education