How an online questionnaire can explore leadership teaching in an undergraduate curriculum.

OBJECTIVES: To design a tool to explore current leadership teaching in an undergraduate curriculum, using the medical leadership competency framework (MLCF) DESIGN: An online questionnaire was designed based on the MLCF competences and sent to all course leads at Imperial College, London in Autumn 2011 SETTING: Imperial College, London PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-nine course leads were invited to participate in the questionnaire study MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Course leads were asked whether they teach each MLCF competence, which teaching methods they use, and how long they spend teaching each competency RESULTS: Overall there was a 78% questionnaire response rate (54/69). From the questionnaires received it was possible to extrapolate results across the remaining courses to achieve a 100% response rate. We were then able to produce a map of current leadership teaching showing that all MLCF competences are taught to varying degrees across the curriculum. The tool does not however provide information on the quality of teaching provided, or what students learn CONCLUSIONS: There is a strong emphasis on the development of teaching leadership skills to undergraduates in Tomorrow's Doctors 2009 (TD09). It is difficult to know what teaching occurs across the curriculum of a large medical school. The design of a simple, electronic questionnaire will enable medical schools to map their current leadership teaching to the TD09 outcomes. This will help to inform further curriculum development and integration as well as signposting of learning opportunities.

Student perceptions of GP teachers' role in community-based undergraduate surgical education: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate medical students' perceptions of a new community-based surgical module being delivered as part of a third-year clinical methods teaching (CMT) course at Imperial College, London. DESIGN: A qualitative study using focus group interviews with medical students who had recently completed the surgical module. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed and analysed to identify key categories that reflected the positive and negative aspects of the student's perspectives. SETTING: Imperial College, London PARTICIPANTS: Two groups of fourth-year medical students were invited to participate in the focus groups. The first group consisted of seven students from the surgery and Anaesthesia BSc course. The second group consisted of a random sample of five students from other BSc courses at Imperial College. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: These were not defined pre-study as the purpose of the study was to obtain student perceptions of the surgical module. Facilitators were given guide questions to aid consistency and prompted discussion where required using an inductive approach to the topics discussed by the students. RESULTS: Student opinions of surgical teaching delivered in the community compared favourably with the surgical teaching delivered in hospitals. Students identified the key benefits as: having protected time to learn, regular access to suitable patients, and teaching that was more learner-centred. Challenges identified by students included the GPs' lack of specialist knowledge and teaching that was dictated by individual interests rather than the syllabus. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based teaching has been widely used to deliver teaching traditionally taught in hospital settings. However, surgical skills are still taught largely by surgical specialists within hospitals. Our study suggests that students are receptive to GPs teaching surgical topics in the community and perceive GPs as competent teachers. This study suggests that there may be benefits in delivering traditional surgical modules in community settings. Providing training for teachers may be a key factor in ensuring quality of surgical teaching for all students.