研究生对撰写有效研究论文工作坊的反馈

Uttam Paul, R. Pal, Kunja Talukdar
{"title":"研究生对撰写有效研究论文工作坊的反馈","authors":"Uttam Paul, R. Pal, Kunja Talukdar","doi":"10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_19_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Researchers on medical educational technologies use learner's feedbacks containing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to develop content and form of training programs in students' learning as a universally approved concept. Objectives: The objectives were to sensitize the first-year postgraduate residents about the publication of research and collect their immediate reflection. Materials and Methods: Feedback was taken from all the 49 participants at the end of the 2-day in-house workshop on “Making an effective research paper.” The data collection tool was unlinked anonymous containing six open-ended questions for immediate postsession evaluation on their futuristic vision on implementation and was analyzed by the researchers. Results: In response to “Comments regarding the research methodology workshop,” more than half agreed on positive aspects of the workshop on improved cognition with relevant information. Overall, favored “best” sessions were “Reference writing,” “Plagiarism check,” and “Search relevant article and write the Literature review.” Regarding the avenue of improvement of the workshop, they stressed on timing of workshop before the synopsis submission of their academic year, pre distribution of reading material, and shorter lengths of sessions. Conclusions: The feedback permitted the participants to echo their candid feelings to meet their learning objective as they rated the workshop constructively for each prompt with gain in broad-based cognitive domain with hopeful attitude for intended practice in their academic growth.","PeriodicalId":93784,"journal":{"name":"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care","volume":"23 2 1","pages":"63 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feedback of postgraduate students about workshop on making an effective research paper\",\"authors\":\"Uttam Paul, R. Pal, Kunja Talukdar\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_19_20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Researchers on medical educational technologies use learner's feedbacks containing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to develop content and form of training programs in students' learning as a universally approved concept. Objectives: The objectives were to sensitize the first-year postgraduate residents about the publication of research and collect their immediate reflection. Materials and Methods: Feedback was taken from all the 49 participants at the end of the 2-day in-house workshop on “Making an effective research paper.” The data collection tool was unlinked anonymous containing six open-ended questions for immediate postsession evaluation on their futuristic vision on implementation and was analyzed by the researchers. Results: In response to “Comments regarding the research methodology workshop,” more than half agreed on positive aspects of the workshop on improved cognition with relevant information. Overall, favored “best” sessions were “Reference writing,” “Plagiarism check,” and “Search relevant article and write the Literature review.” Regarding the avenue of improvement of the workshop, they stressed on timing of workshop before the synopsis submission of their academic year, pre distribution of reading material, and shorter lengths of sessions. Conclusions: The feedback permitted the participants to echo their candid feelings to meet their learning objective as they rated the workshop constructively for each prompt with gain in broad-based cognitive domain with hopeful attitude for intended practice in their academic growth.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care\",\"volume\":\"23 2 1\",\"pages\":\"63 - 67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_19_20\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of primary care specialties : official publication of the Institute of Family Medicine and Primary Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jopcs.jopcs_19_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:医学教育技术的研究人员利用学习者的反馈,包括优势、劣势、机会和威胁,来开发学生学习训练计划的内容和形式,作为一个普遍认可的概念。目的:目的是敏感的第一年研究生住院医师的研究发表,并收集他们的即时反映。材料和方法:在为期两天的“撰写有效的研究论文”内部研讨会结束时,所有49名参与者都给出了反馈。数据收集工具是匿名的,包含六个开放式问题,用于即时会后评估他们对实施的未来愿景,并由研究人员进行分析。结果:在对“关于研究方法研讨会的评论”的回应中,超过一半的人同意研讨会在提高认知能力方面的积极方面。总的来说,最受欢迎的课程是“参考写作”、“剽窃检查”和“搜索相关文章并撰写文献综述”。关于改进讲习班的途径,他们强调在提交学年概要之前安排讲习班、预先分发阅读材料和缩短会议长度。结论:反馈允许参与者回应他们坦诚的感受,以满足他们的学习目标,因为他们对每个提示都有建设性的评价,在广泛的认知领域获得了收获,并对他们在学术成长中的预期实践抱有希望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Feedback of postgraduate students about workshop on making an effective research paper
Background: Researchers on medical educational technologies use learner's feedbacks containing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to develop content and form of training programs in students' learning as a universally approved concept. Objectives: The objectives were to sensitize the first-year postgraduate residents about the publication of research and collect their immediate reflection. Materials and Methods: Feedback was taken from all the 49 participants at the end of the 2-day in-house workshop on “Making an effective research paper.” The data collection tool was unlinked anonymous containing six open-ended questions for immediate postsession evaluation on their futuristic vision on implementation and was analyzed by the researchers. Results: In response to “Comments regarding the research methodology workshop,” more than half agreed on positive aspects of the workshop on improved cognition with relevant information. Overall, favored “best” sessions were “Reference writing,” “Plagiarism check,” and “Search relevant article and write the Literature review.” Regarding the avenue of improvement of the workshop, they stressed on timing of workshop before the synopsis submission of their academic year, pre distribution of reading material, and shorter lengths of sessions. Conclusions: The feedback permitted the participants to echo their candid feelings to meet their learning objective as they rated the workshop constructively for each prompt with gain in broad-based cognitive domain with hopeful attitude for intended practice in their academic growth.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in a tertiary care setup: A cross-sectional observational single-center-based study in Eastern India Knowledge and perceptions of medical students about generic medicines in a medical college in North India Acute undifferentiated fever presenting as multi-organ dysfunction: Narrowing the differential diagnosis A study on patients with pleural effusion with emphasis on pleural fluid adenosine deaminase and pleural biopsy Corticosteroid-induced avascular bone necrosis and possible association with prior COVID-19 infection
×
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