An exploration of the impact of working in pairs on the dental clinical learning environment: Students' views.

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to explore the undergraduate dental clinical students' experiences and perspectives of paired working in the clinical learning environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An interpretivist methodological approach with a socio-cultural lens was used. A stratified purposeful sampling strategy was chosen. Students digitally recorded three audio-diaries using Gibbs' cycle to guide reflection on collaborating clinically with a peer. 1:1 semi-structured interviews were held using a topic guide. Inductive thematic data analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Eight participants were recruited. Main themes related to individual characteristics (motivation, professionalism, knowledge and experience) and relational features (feeling safe, attaching value, positive working relationships) that contributed to effective collaborative partnerships. The social setting is important for learning in the dental clinical environment. Benchmarking is used by students to motivate and reassure. Students learnt from their peers, particularly when they felt safe and supported and had developed good relationships. A lesser quality learning experience was highlighted in the assistant role. CONCLUSION: Paired working for clinical training was viewed mostly positively. Working with a variety of peers was beneficial and enabled development of interpersonal skills and professionalism. More effective collaborative learning partnerships were described when students felt they belonged and had affective support. Disadvantages of paired working were noted as reduced hands-on experience, particularly for senior students and when working in the assistant role. Ground rules and setting learning goals to change the mind-set about the assistant role were recommended. Emotional and practical support of students is needed in the clinical setting.

Experiences of mentoring ST4-ST5s amongst a group of orthodontic trainers at Bristol Dental School and Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of mentoring higher-grade trainees amongst senior orthodontic trainers at Bristol Dental School. DESIGN: Qualitative study using interpretive methodology. SETTING: University of Bristol Dental School. PARTICIPANTS: Six consultant orthodontists, five of whom also have district general hospital experience. METHODS: One-to-one semi-structured interviews were undertaken on a purposeful sample of orthodontic trainers. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and Thematic Analysis was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged from the data were. They were: How to Mentor; Mentor-Mentee Pairings; Resources and Success; and Pitfalls of Mentoring. CONCLUSION: The present study revealed that senior trainers have a good understanding of the qualities of a mentor and appreciate the roles which mentors need to perform. They are altruistic in their motives, but would benefit from more time, organisational support and training to help them perform their duties better.

Instruments to measure the ability to self-reflect: A systematic review of evidence from workplace and educational settings including health care.

INTRODUCTION: Self-reflection has become recognised as a core skill in dental education, although the ability to self-reflect is valued and measured within several professions. This review appraises the evidence for instruments available to measure the self-reflective ability of adults studying or working within any setting, not just health care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of 20 electronic databases (including Medline, ERIC, CINAHL and Business Source Complete) from 1975 to 2017, supplemented by citation searches. Data were extracted from each study and the studies graded against quality indicators by at least two independent reviewers, using a coding sheet. Reviewers completed a utility analysis of the assessment instruments described within included studies, appraising their reported reliability, validity, educational impact, acceptability and cost. RESULTS: A total of 131 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eighteen were judged to provide higher quality evidence for the review and three broad types of instrument were identified, namely: rubrics (or scoring guides), self-reported scales and observed behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: Three types of instrument were identified to assess the ability to self-reflect. It was not possible to recommend a single most effective instrument due to under reporting of the criteria necessary for a full utility analysis of each. The use of more than one instrument may therefore be appropriate dependent on the acceptability to the faculty, assessor, student and cost. Future research should report on the utility of assessment instruments and provide guidance on what constitutes thresholds of acceptable or unacceptable ability to self-reflect, and how this should be managed.

Between fairness and fear-Dental undergraduates' attitudes towards objective structured clinical examinations.

INTRODUCTION: Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are an established method of assessment for dental undergraduates. There is little published dental education research exploring the views of undergraduates towards OSCEs. AIM: To explore and describe the views of dental undergraduates towards OSCEs. METHOD: A sequential mixed methods design was applied. This included a cross-sectional survey of all 204 dental undergraduates in Years 2, 3 and 4 within a UK dental school using an anonymous self-report online questionnaire (response rate 57%), which was followed by two focus group interviews of n = 10 Year-2 students. RESULTS: Most students gave positive views regarding the OSCE form of assessment. Questionnaire data highlighted that students felt that the OSCE tested their diagnostic, clinical and communication skills, and covered a wide range of skills and disciplines. Students also generally saw them as a useful educational exercise that went beyond testing recall of facts. Most students thought that the OSCEs were "fair" assessments. Negative views focused around student lack of preparation for them, especially in earlier years. Focus group data explored further these concerns but also emphasised the need for more student-centred support pre-OSCE. CONCLUSION: Objective structured clinical examinations can be an anxiety-inspiring form of assessment for students in the early years of the programme. Dental educators need to be more aware of these concerns to develop strategies to increase student preparedness for OSCEs without increasing stress.