Consensus-derived Recommended Skills for Transition to Residency Courses.

PURPOSE: Transition to residency (TTR) courses facilitate the medical student-residency transition and are an integral part of senior medical student training. The authors established a common set of skills for TTR courses and an expected level of entrustment students should demonstrate in each skill on TTR course completion. METHOD: A modified Delphi approach was used with 3 survey iterations between 2020 and 2022 to establish skills to be included in a TTR course. Nine TTR experts suggested general candidate skills and conducted a literature search to ensure no vital skills were missed. A stakeholder panel was solicited from email lists of TTR educators, residency program directors, and residents at the panelists' institutions. Consensus was defined as more than 75% of participants selecting a positive inclusion response. An entrustment questionnaire asked panelists to assign a level of expected entrustment to each skill, with 1 indicating observation only and 6 indicating perform independently. RESULTS: The stakeholder panel initially consisted of 118 respondents with representation across educational contexts and clinical specialties. Response rates were 54% in iteration 2, 42% in iteration 3, and 33% on the entrustment questionnaire. After 3 iterations, 54 skills met consensus and were consolidated into 37 final skills categorized into 18 clinical skills (e.g., assessment and management of inpatient concerns), 14 communication skills (e.g., delivering serious news or having difficult conversations), 4 personal and professional skills (e.g., prioritization of clinical tasks), and 1 procedural skill (mask ventilation). Median entrustment levels were reported for all skills, with 19 skills having a level of expected entrustment of 4 (perform independently and have all findings double-checked). CONCLUSIONS: These consensus skills can serve as the foundation of a standardized national TTR curriculum framework. Entrustment guidance may help educational leaders optimize training and allocation of resources for TTR curriculum development and implementation.

Enhancing Clinical Teaching in Critical Thinking, High-Value Care, and Health Care Equity.

INTRODUCTION: Faculty development in the clinical setting is challenging to implement and assess. This study evaluated an intervention (IG) to enhance bedside teaching in three content areas: critical thinking (CT), high-value care (HVC), and health care equity (HCE). METHODS: The Communities of Practice model and Theoretical Domains Framework informed IG development. Three multidepartmental working groups (WGs) (CT, HVC, HCE) developed three 2-hour sessions delivered over three months. Evaluation addressed faculty satisfaction, knowledge acquisition, and behavior change. Data collection included surveys and observations of teaching during patient care. Primary analyses compared counts of post-IG teaching behaviors per hour across intervention group (IG), comparison group (CG), and WG groups. Statistical analyses of counts were modeled with generalized linear models using the Poisson distribution. RESULTS: Eighty-seven faculty members participated (IG n = 30, CG n = 28, WG n = 29). Sixty-eight (IG n = 28, CG n = 23, WG n = 17) were observed, with a median of 3 observation sessions and 5.2 hours each. Postintervention comparison of teaching (average counts/hour) showed statistically significant differences across groups: CT CG = 4.1, IG = 4.8, WG = 8.2; HVC CG = 0.6, IG = 0.9, WG = 1.6; and HCE CG = 0.2, IG = 0.4, WG = 1.4 ( P < .001). DISCUSSION: A faculty development intervention focused on teaching in the context of providing clinical care resulted in more frequent teaching of CT, HVC, and HCE in the intervention group compared with controls. WG faculty demonstrated highest teaching counts and provide benchmarks to assess future interventions. With the creation of durable teaching materials and a cadre of trained faculty, this project sets a foundation for infusing substantive content into clinical teaching.

Self-Directed Learning in Medical Education: Training for a Lifetime of Discovery.

Issue: Life-long learning is a skill that is central to competent health professionals, and medical educators have sought to understand how adult professionals learn, adapt to new information, and independently seek to learn more. Accrediting bodies now mandate that training programs teach in ways that promote self-directed learning (SDL) but do not provide adequate guidance on how to address this requirement. Evidence: The model for the SDL mandate in physician training is based mostly on early childhood and secondary education evidence and literature, and may not capture the unique environment of medical training and clinical education. Furthermore, there is uncertainty about how medical schools and postgraduate training programs should implement and evaluate SDL educational interventions. The Shapiro Institute for Education and Research, in conjunction with the Association of American Medical Colleges, convened teams from eight medical schools from North America to address the challenge of defining, implementing, and evaluating SDL and the structures needed to nurture and support its development in health professional training. Implications: In this commentary, the authors describe SDL in Medical Education, (SDL-ME), which is a construct of learning and pedagogy specific to medical students and physicians in training. SDL-ME builds on the foundations of SDL and self-regulated learning theory, but is specifically contextualized for the unique responsibilities of physicians to patients, inter-professional teams, and society. Through consensus, the authors offer suggestions for training programs to teach and evaluate SDL-ME. To teach self-directed learning requires placing the construct in the context of patient care and of an obligation to society at large. The SDL-ME construct builds upon SDL and SRL frameworks and suggests SDL as foundational to health professional identity formation.KEYWORDSself-directed learning; graduate medical education; undergraduate medical education; theoretical frameworksSupplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2021.1938074 .

The Harvard Medical School Pathways Curriculum: Reimagining Developmentally Appropriate Medical Education for Contemporary Learners.

As the U.S. health care system changes and technology alters how doctors work and learn, medical schools and their faculty are compelled to modify their curricula and teaching methods. In this article, educational leaders and key faculty describe how the Pathways curriculum was conceived, designed, and implemented at Harvard Medical School. Faculty were committed to the principle that educators should focus on how students learn and their ability to apply what they learn in the evaluation and care of patients. Using the best evidence from the cognitive sciences about adult learning, they made major changes in the pedagogical approach employed in the classroom and clinic. The curriculum was built upon 4 foundational principles: to enhance critical thinking and provide developmentally appropriate content; to ensure both horizontal integration between courses and vertical integration between phases of the curriculum; to engage learners, foster curiosity, and reinforce the importance of student ownership and responsibility for their learning; and to support students' transformation to a professional dedicated to the care of their patients and to their obligations for lifelong, self-directed learning.The practice of medicine is rapidly evolving and will undoubtedly change in multiple ways over the career of a physician. By emphasizing personal responsibility, professionalism, and thinking skills over content transfer, the authors believe this curriculum will prepare students not only for the first day of practice but also for an uncertain future in the biological sciences, health and disease, and the nation's health care system, which they will encounter in the decades to come.

A novel resident-as-teacher training program to improve and evaluate obstetrics and gynecology resident teaching skills.

BACKGROUND: Residents play a significant role in teaching, but formal training, feedback, and evaluation are needed. AIMS: Our aims were to assess resident teaching skills in the resident-as-teacher program, quantify correlations of faculty evaluations with resident self-evaluations, compare resident-as-teacher evaluations with clinical evaluations, and evaluate the resident-as-teacher program. METHOD: The resident-as-teacher training program is a simulated, videotaped teaching encounter with a trained medical student and standardized teaching evaluation tool. Evaluations from the resident-as-teacher training program were compared to evaluations of resident teaching done by faculty, residents, and medical students from the clinical setting. RESULTS: Faculty evaluation of resident teaching skills in the resident-as-teacher program showed a mean total score of 4.5 ± 0.5 with statistically significant correlations between faculty assessment and resident self-evaluations (r = 0.47; p < 0.001). However, resident self-evaluation of teaching skill was lower than faculty evaluation (mean difference: 0.4; 95% CI 0.3-0.6). When compared to the clinical setting, resident-as-teacher evaluations were significantly correlated with faculty and resident evaluations, but not medical student evaluations. Evaluations from both the resident-as-teacher program and the clinical setting improved with duration of residency. CONCLUSIONS: The resident-as-teacher program provides a method to train, give feedback, and evaluate resident teaching.

Developing expert-derived rating standards for the peer assessment of lectures.

PURPOSE: For peer review of teaching to be credible and reliable, peer raters must be trained to identify and measure teaching behaviors accurately. Peer rater training, therefore, must be based on expert-derived rating standards of teaching performance. The authors sought to establish precise lecture rating standards for use in peer rater training at their school. METHOD: From 2008 to 2010, a panel of experts, who had previously helped to develop an instrument for the peer assessment of lecturing, met to observe, discuss, and rate 40 lectures, using a consensus-building model to determine key behaviors and levels of proficiency for each of the instrument's 11 criteria. During this process, the panelists supplemented the original instrument with precise behavioral descriptors of lecturing. The reliability of the derived rating standards was assessed by having the panelists score six sample lectures independently. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients of the panelists' ratings of the lectures ranged from 0.75 to 0.96. There was moderate to high positive association between 10 of the 11 instrument's criteria and the overall performance score (r = 0.752-0.886). There were no statistically significant differences among raters in terms of leniency or stringency of scores. CONCLUSIONS: Two relational themes, content and style, were identified within the instrument's variables. Recommendations for developing expert-derived ratings standards include using an interdisciplinary group for observation, discussion, and verbal identification of behaviors; asking members to consider views that contrast with their own; and noting key teaching behaviors for use in future peer rater training.