Reasons to Engage in and Learning Experiences From Different Play Strategies in a Web-Based Serious Game on Delirium for Medical Students:Mixed Methods Design

BACKGROUND: Although many studies have recently been published on the value of serious games for medical education, little attention has been given to the role of dark play (choosing unacceptable actions in games). OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate potential differences in the characteristics of medical students who have the opportunity to choose normal or dark play in a serious game. This study also aimed to compare their reasons for choosing a play strategy and their perceptions of what they learned from their game play. METHODS: We asked undergraduate medical students to play a serious game in which they had to take care of a patient with delirium (The Delirium Experience). After getting acquainted with the game, students could opt for normal or dark play. Student characteristics (age, gender, experience with caring for older or delirious patients, and number of completed clerkships) were collected, and the Delirium Attitude Scale and Learning Motivation and Engagement Questionnaire were administered. Reasons for choosing normal or dark play were evaluated with an open-ended question. Information on lessons they had learned from the game was collected using an open-ended question and self-reported knowledge on delirium. RESULTS: This study had 160 participants (89 normal play, 71 dark play). Male students (26/160, 56.5%) chose dark play significantly more often than female students (45/160, 39.5%; P=.049). We did not find significant differences in student characteristics or measurement outcomes between play strategies. Participants' main reason for choosing normal play was to learn how to provide care to delirious patients, and the main reason for dark play was to gain insight into what a delirious patient has to endure during delirious episodes. All participants learned what to do when taking care of a delirious patient and gained insight into how a patient experiences delirium. We found no differences in self-reported knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: When medical students have the opportunity to choose dark play in a serious game, half of them will probably choose this play strategy. Male students will more likely opt for dark play than female students. Choice of play strategy is not affected by any other student characteristic or measurement outcome. All students learned the same lessons from playing the game, irrespective of their learning strategy

Residents Think in the “Now” and Supervisors Think Ahead in the Operating Room. A Survey Study About Task Perception of Residents and Supervising Surgeons

Objective: Progressive autonomous task performance is the cornerstone of teaching residents in the operating room, where they are entrusted with autonomy when they meet their supervisors’ preferences. To optimize the teaching, supervisors need to be aware of how residents experience parts of the procedure. This study provides insight into how supervisors and residents perceive different tasks of a single surgical procedure. Design: In this qualitative survey study a cognitive task analysis (CTA) of supervisors and residents for the 47 tasks of an uncemented total hip arthroplasty was executed. Both groups rated the level of attention they would assign to each task and were asked to explain attention scores of 4 or 5. Setting: University Medical Centre Groningen (the Netherlands) and its 5 affiliated teaching hospitals. Participants: Seventeen supervising surgeons and 21 residents. Results: Normal attention (median attention score 3) was assigned by supervisors to 34 tasks (72.3%) and by residents to 35 tasks (74.5 %). Supervisors rated 12 tasks (25.6%) and residents 9 tasks (19.1%) with a median attention score of 4. In general, supervisors associated high attention with patient outcome and prevention of complications, while residents associated high attention with “effort.” Conclusions: Supervisors and residents assigned attention to tasks for different reasons. Supervisors think ahead and emphasize patient outcome and prevention of complications when they indicate high attention, while residents think in the “now” and raise attention to execute the tasks themselves. The results of this study allow residents and supervisors to anticipate preferences: residents are able to appreciate why supervisors increase attention to specific tasks, and supervisors obtain information on which tasks require individual guidance of residents. This information can contribute to improve the learning climate in the operating room and task-specific procedural training

Residents Think in the “Now” and Supervisors Think Ahead in the Operating Room. A Survey Study About Task Perception of Residents and Supervising Surgeons

Objective: Progressive autonomous task performance is the cornerstone of teaching residents in the operating room, where they are entrusted with autonomy when they meet their supervisors’ preferences. To optimize the teaching, supervisors need to be aware of how residents experience parts of the procedure. This study provides insight into how supervisors and residents perceive different tasks of a single surgical procedure. Design: In this qualitative survey study a cognitive task analysis (CTA) of supervisors and residents for the 47 tasks of an uncemented total hip arthroplasty was executed. Both groups rated the level of attention they would assign to each task and were asked to explain attention scores of 4 or 5. Setting: University Medical Centre Groningen (the Netherlands) and its 5 affiliated teaching hospitals. Participants: Seventeen supervising surgeons and 21 residents. Results: Normal attention (median attention score 3) was assigned by supervisors to 34 tasks (72.3%) and by residents to 35 tasks (74.5 %). Supervisors rated 12 tasks (25.6%) and residents 9 tasks (19.1%) with a median attention score of 4. In general, supervisors associated high attention with patient outcome and prevention of complications, while residents associated high attention with “effort.” Conclusions: Supervisors and residents assigned attention to tasks for different reasons. Supervisors think ahead and emphasize patient outcome and prevention of complications when they indicate high attention, while residents think in the “now” and raise attention to execute the tasks themselves. The results of this study allow residents and supervisors to anticipate preferences: residents are able to appreciate why supervisors increase attention to specific tasks, and supervisors obtain information on which tasks require individual guidance of residents. This information can contribute to improve the learning climate in the operating room and task-specific procedural training

Programmatic assessment of competency-based workplace learning: when theory meets practice

Contains fulltext : 125808.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: In competency-based medical education emphasis has shifted towards outcomes, capabilities, and learner-centeredness. Together with a focus on sustained evidence of professional competence this calls for new methods of teaching and assessment. Recently, medical educators advocated the use of a holistic, programmatic approach towards assessment. Besides maximum facilitation of learning it should improve the validity and reliability of measurements and documentation of competence development. We explored how, in a competency-based curriculum, current theories on programmatic assessment interacted with educational practice. METHODS: In a development study including evaluation, we investigated the implementation of a theory-based programme of assessment. Between April 2011 and May 2012 quantitative evaluation data were collected and used to guide group interviews that explored the experiences of students and clinical supervisors with the assessment programme. We coded the transcripts and emerging topics were organised into a list of lessons learned. RESULTS: The programme mainly focuses on the integration of learning and assessment by motivating and supporting students to seek and accumulate feedback. The assessment instruments were aligned to cover predefined competencies to enable aggregation of information in a structured and meaningful way. Assessments that were designed as formative learning experiences were increasingly perceived as summative by students. Peer feedback was experienced as a valuable method for formative feedback. Social interaction and external guidance seemed to be of crucial importance to scaffold self-directed learning. Aggregating data from individual assessments into a holistic portfolio judgement required expertise and extensive training and supervision of judges. CONCLUSIONS: A programme of assessment with low-stakes assessments providing simultaneously formative feedback and input for summative decisions proved not easy to implement. Careful preparation and guidance of the implementation process was crucial. Assessment for learning requires meaningful feedback with each assessment. Special attention should be paid to the quality of feedback at individual assessment moments. Comprehensive attention for faculty development and training for students is essential for the successful implementation of an assessment programme