How to coach student professional development during times of challenges and uncertainties.

BACKGROUND: What we teach our (bio)medical students today may differ from the future context under which they will operate as health professionals. This shifting and highly demanding profession requires that we equip these students with adaptive competencies for their future careers. We aimed to develop a framework to promote and facilitate professional development from day one, guided by self-awareness and self-directed learning. APPROACH: Based on self-directed, transformative and experiential learning, patient involvement and teamwork, we developed a 3-year longitudinal personal-professional development (LPPD) program in the (bio)medical sciences undergraduate curriculum to stimulate self-driven professional development in a variable context. Through group meetings and individual coach consultations, students address topics such as self-awareness, self-directed and lifelong learning, collaboration, well-being and resilience. To drive learning students receive extensive narrative feedback on an essay assignment. EVALUATION: Experiences and outcomes were evaluated with questionnaires and in-depth interviews. Students and coaches value personal and professional development in a safe learning environment that encourages self-exploration, diversity and connection. Over time, students show more self-awareness and self-directedness and increasingly apply trained skills, resulting in professional identity formation. Students need more clarification to understand the concept of assessment as learning. IMPLICATIONS: With the generic content of a longitudinal program embedded in a meaningful environment, the personal and professional development of students can be facilitated and stimulated to face future challenges. When translating to other curricula, we suggest considering the complexity of professional development and the time expenditure needed for students to explore, experiment and practice. An early start and thorough integration are recommended.

Validity, reliability and feasibility of a new observation rating tool and a post encounter rating tool for the assessment of clinical reasoning skills of medical students during their internal medicine clerkship: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Systematic assessment of clinical reasoning skills of medical students in clinical practice is very difficult. This is partly caused by the lack of understanding of the fundamental mechanisms underlying the process of clinical reasoning. METHODS: We previously developed an observation tool to assess the clinical reasoning skills of medical students during clinical practice. This observation tool consists of an 11-item observation rating form (ORT). In the present study we verified the validity, reliability and feasibility of this tool and of an already existing post-encounter rating tool (PERT) in clinical practice among medical students during the internal medicine clerkship. RESULTS: Six raters each assessed the same 15 student-patient encounters. The internal consistency (Cronbach's alfa) for the (ORT) was 0.87 (0.71-0.84) and the 5-item (PERT) was 0.81 (0.71-0.87). The intraclass-correlation coefficient for single measurements was poor for both the ORT; 0.32 (p < 0.001) as well as the PERT; 0.36 (p < 0.001). The Generalizability study (G-study) and decision study (D-study) showed that 6 raters are required to achieve a G-coefficient of > 0.7 for the ORT and 7 raters for the PERT. The largest sources of variance are the interaction between raters and students. There was a consistent correlation between the ORT and PERT of 0.53 (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The ORT and PERT are both feasible, valid and reliable instruments to assess students' clinical reasoning skills in clinical practice.

Observable phenomena that reveal medical students' clinical reasoning ability during expert assessment of their history taking: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: During their clerkships, medical students are meant to expand their clinical reasoning skills during their patient encounters. Observation of these encounters could reveal important information on the students' clinical reasoning abilities, especially during history taking. METHODS: A grounded theory approach was used to analyze what expert physicians apply as indicators in their assessment of medical students' diagnostic reasoning abilities during history taking. Twelve randomly selected clinical encounter recordings of students at the end of the internal medicine clerkships were observed by six expert assessors, who were prompted to formulate their assessment criteria in a think-aloud procedure. These formulations were then analyzed to identify the common denominators and leading principles. RESULTS: The main indicators of clinical reasoning ability were abstracted from students' observable acts during history taking in the encounter. These were: taking control, recognizing and responding to relevant information, specifying symptoms, asking specific questions that point to pathophysiological thinking, placing questions in a logical order, checking agreement with patients, summarizing and body language. In addition, patients' acts and the course, result and efficiency of the conversation were identified as indicators of clinical reasoning, whereas context, using self as a reference, and emotion/feelings were identified by the clinicians as variables in their assessment of clinical reasoning. CONCLUSIONS: In observing and assessing clinical reasoning during history taking by medical students, general and specific phenomena to be used as indicators for this process could be identified. These phenomena can be traced back to theories on the development and the process of clinical reasoning.

The teacher as coach: An innovative, longitudinal training for (bio)medical educators.

BACKGROUND: In order to be impactful, to support students to become resilient, adaptive, and collaborative lifelong learning professionals in an ever-changing environment requires the teachers to have a specific set of skills and abilities. Teachers who are not taught these competencies struggle empirically and cannot coach students effectively in the modern professional world. APPROACH: We developed a longitudinal programme for teachers, combining theory and skills training, and performed nine half-day hands-on training modules on campus. Special attention was paid to a common frame of mind, coaching techniques, and dealing with students' emotions and resistance. EVALUATION: All 16 participating teachers indicated their learning goals beforehand and their learning outcomes afterwards. Before and after finishing the course, participants completed a questionnaire in which they evaluated their own evolving coaching competencies. In the next academic year, students of both participants and non-participants evaluated their teachers' coaching competencies. Participants experienced the added value of coaching and understood how to coach. They reported being able to focus on fostering the student's development instead of being knowledge-transferring and advising mentors. Students recognised that coaching teachers (participants) provided less advice and focused more on students' responsibility. IMPLICATIONS: To prepare teachers for coaching students in their professional development, early investment is recommended. A dedicated coach training programme, as outlined by us, can facilitate and stimulate the desired transition from a role-modelling, knowledge-transferring academic teacher, mentor, or adviser to a professional development coaching teacher. When translating to other curricula, we recommend to take into account the adaptation of generic content in the local learning environment.

Co-learning and co-teaching in a newly introduced research learning community.

BACKGROUND: Research clerkships are usually designed as individual learning projects focusing on research skills training, such as research design, data analysis and reporting. When the COVID-19 pandemic triggered an urgent need for digital education, we redesigned a research clerkship with the challenging aim to maintain original quality for more students than usual with limited teaching staff. APPROACH: We introduced the concept of a research learning community (RLC) with co-teaching and co-learning to a group of 14 students and seven teaching faculty using digital platforms. Small groups of students participated in the RLC, which was supervised weekly by the teachers. Research experts were continuously involved and led workshops. EVALUATION: Using a qualitative design, we analysed experiences from the perspectives of students and faculty. We performed an inductive thematic content analysis of three focus group interviews and used 14 student reports for triangulation. The results indicate that apart from developing research skills, students valued peer assistance, attention to uncertainty and learning beyond individual research projects. The teachers/research experts reported that co-teaching and co-learning had contributed to their professional development. In terms of organisation, students and faculty recognised that the RLC model allowed for interdisciplinary learning, facilitated by a digital platform. IMPLICATIONS: To develop students' research skills, embedding a clerkship in an RLC is an attractive alternative to individual research clerkships. The obligatory learning goals are met. Co-learning and co-teaching foster faculty's and students' professional development. When translating to other curricula, we recommend stating common goals in addition to individual objectives.