A facilitative versus directive approach in training clinical skills? Investigating students' clinical performance and perceptions
A facilitative versus directive approach in training clinical skills? Investigating students' clinical performance and perceptions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s40037-012-0018-z
复制
发表时间：
2012-08-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Struyven, Katrien
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Berghmans, Inneke;Druine, Nathalie;Struyven, Katrien
多年来，许多医学院的课程已经开始实施多样化的以学生为中心的教学方法。然而，之前的研究表明，学生更喜欢更传统和指导性的方法，这就提出了应该提倡哪种培训方法的问题。本研究将以学生为中心（即促进性）培训方法对学生临床技能学习的影响与学生的看法进行了对比。更具体地说，建立了一项准实验研究，让学生体验指导性或促进性培训方法。一方面通过欧安组织收集数据，另一方面通过问卷调查了解学生对培训课程的看法，以及两个关于学生好恶的开放式问题。虽然在临床知识和理解以及实际临床表现方面没有发现普遍差异，但发现学生特定课程的先验知识和培训方法之间存在相互作用。特别是知识水平较低的学生从临床知识方面的辅助培训方法中受益更多，而知识水平较高的学生则经历了这种培训方法的负面影响。此外，学生的看法显示，接受过引导式培训的学生报告了更深层次的学习，而指导性培训方法在质量和感知效果方面得分更高。
Over the years, many medical school curricula have started implementing diverse student-centred teaching and learning methodologies. Previous studies, however, have indicated that students prefer more traditional and directive methodologies instead, raising questions on which training approach should be advocated. This study contrasts the effects of a student-centred (i.e. facilitative) training approach on students' clinical skills learning with students' perceptions. More specifically, a quasi-experimental study was set up in which students experienced either a directive or facilitative training approach. Data were collected by means of an OSCE on the one hand, and a questionnaire on students' perceptions of the training sessions, and two open-ended questions about students' likes and dislikes on the other hand. While no general differences were found in terms of clinical knowledge and understanding, and actual clinical performance, an interaction between students' course-specific prior knowledge and the training approach was found. Especially students with low levels of knowledge benefited more from the facilitative training approach in terms of clinical knowledge, while highly knowledgeable students experienced a negative effect of this training approach. Moreover, students' perceptions revealed that facilitative-trained students reported more deep-level learning, while the directive training approach turned out to score higher in terms of quality and perceived effects.