The role of peer meetings for professional development in health science education: a qualitative analysis of reflective essays

Introduction The development of professional behaviour is an important objective for students in Health Sciences, with reflective skills being a basic condition for this development. Literature describes a variety of methods giving students opportunities and encouragement for reflection. Although the literature states that learning and working together in peer meetings fosters reflection, these findings are based on experienced professionals. We do not know whether participation in peer meetings also makes a positive contribution to the learning experiences of undergraduate students in terms of reflection. Aim The aim of this study is to gain an understanding of the role of peer meetings in students’ learning experiences regarding reflection. Method A phenomenographic qualitative study was undertaken. Students’ learning experiences in peer meetings were analyzed by investigating the learning reports in students’ portfolios. Data were coded using open coding. Results The results indicate that peer meetings created an interactive learning environment in which students learned about themselves, their skills and their abilities as novice professionals. Students also mentioned conditions for a well-functioning group. Conclusion The findings indicate that peer meetings foster the development of reflection skills as part of professional behaviour

Factors confounding the assessment of reflection: a critical review

BACKGROUND: Reflection on experience is an increasingly critical part of professional development and lifelong learning. There is, however, continuing uncertainty about how best to put principle into practice, particularly as regards assessment. This article explores those uncertainties in order to find practical ways of assessing reflection. DISCUSSION: We critically review four problems: 1. Inconsistent definitions of reflection; 2. Lack of standards to determine (in)adequate reflection; 3. Factors that complicate assessment; 4. Internal and external contextual factors affecting the assessment of reflection. SUMMARY: To address the problem of inconsistency, we identified processes that were common to a number of widely quoted theories and synthesised a model, which yielded six indicators that could be used in assessment instruments. We arrived at the conclusion that, until further progress has been made in defining standards, assessment must depend on developing and communicating local consensus between stakeholders (students, practitioners, teachers, supervisors, curriculum developers) about what is expected in exercises and formal tests. Major factors that complicate assessment are the subjective nature of reflection's content and the dependency on descriptions by persons being assessed about their reflection process, without any objective means of verification. To counter these validity threats, we suggest that assessment should focus on generic process skills rather than the subjective content of reflection and where possible to consider objective information about the triggering situation to verify described reflections. Finally, internal and external contextual factors such as motivation, instruction, character of assessment (formative or summative) and the ability of individual learning environments to stimulate reflection should be considered

Assessing student reflection in medical practice. The development of an observer-rated instrument: reliability, validity and initial experiences

INTRODUCTION This study describes the development of an instrument to measure the ability of medical students to reflect on their performance in medical practice. METHODS A total of 195 Year 4 medical students attending a 9-hour clinical ethics course filled in a semi-structured questionnaire consisting of reflection-evoking case vignettes. Two independent raters scored their answers. Respondents were scored on a 10-point scale for overall reflection score and on a scale of 0-2 for the extent to which they mentioned a series of perspectives in their reflections. We analysed the distribution of scores, the internal validity and the effect of being pre-tested with an alternate form of the test on the scores. The relationships between overall reflection score and perspective score, and between overall reflection score and gender, career preference and work experience were also calculated. RESULTS The interrater reliability was sufficient. The range of scores on overall reflection was large (1-10), with a mean reflection score of 4.5-4.7 for each case vignette. This means that only 1 or 2 perspectives were mentioned, and hardly any weighing of perspectives took place. The values over the 2 measurements were comparable and were strongly related. Women had slightly higher scores than men, as had students with work experience in health care, and students considering general practice as a career. CONCLUSIONS Reflection in medical practice can be measured using this semistructured questionnaire built on case vignettes. The mean score allows for the measurement of improvement by future educational efforts. The wide range of individual differences allows for comparisons between groups. The differences found between groups of students were as expected and support the validity of the instrument