Cargando…

Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study

OBJECTIVES: To explore Foundation trainees’ and trainers’ understandings and experiences of supervised learning events (SLEs), compared with workplace-based assessments (WPBAs), and their suggestions for developing SLEs. DESIGN: A narrative interview study based on 55 individual and 19 group intervi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rees, Charlotte E, Cleland, Jennifer A, Dennis, Ashley, Kelly, Narcie, Mattick, Karen, Monrouxe, Lynn V
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4202004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25324323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005980
_version_ 1782340249233391616
author Rees, Charlotte E
Cleland, Jennifer A
Dennis, Ashley
Kelly, Narcie
Mattick, Karen
Monrouxe, Lynn V
author_facet Rees, Charlotte E
Cleland, Jennifer A
Dennis, Ashley
Kelly, Narcie
Mattick, Karen
Monrouxe, Lynn V
author_sort Rees, Charlotte E
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To explore Foundation trainees’ and trainers’ understandings and experiences of supervised learning events (SLEs), compared with workplace-based assessments (WPBAs), and their suggestions for developing SLEs. DESIGN: A narrative interview study based on 55 individual and 19 group interviews. SETTING: UK-wide study across three sites in England, Scotland and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Using maximum-variation sampling, 70 Foundation trainees and 40 trainers were recruited, shared their understandings and experiences of SLEs/WPBAs and made recommendations for future practice. METHODS: Data were analysed using thematic and discourse analysis and narrative analysis of one exemplar personal incident narrative. RESULTS: While participants volunteered understandings of SLEs as learning and assessment, they typically volunteered understandings of WPBAs as assessment. Trainers seemed more likely to describe SLEs as assessment and a ‘safety net’ to protect patients than trainees. We identified 333 personal incident narratives in our data (221 SLEs; 72 WPBAs). There was perceived variability in the conduct of SLEs/WPBAs in terms of their initiation, tools used, feedback and finalisation. Numerous factors at individual, interpersonal, cultural and technological levels were thought to facilitate/hinder learning. SLE narratives were more likely to be evaluated positively than WPBA narratives overall and by trainees specifically. Participants made sense of their experiences, emotions, identities and relationships through their narratives. They provided numerous suggestions for improving SLEs at individual, interpersonal, cultural and technological levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide tentative support for the shift to formative learning with the introduction of SLEs, albeit raising concerns around trainees’ and trainers’ understandings about SLEs. We identify five key educational recommendations from our study. Additional research is now needed to explore further the complexities around SLEs within workplace learning.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4202004
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-42020042014-10-21 Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study Rees, Charlotte E Cleland, Jennifer A Dennis, Ashley Kelly, Narcie Mattick, Karen Monrouxe, Lynn V BMJ Open Medical Education and Training OBJECTIVES: To explore Foundation trainees’ and trainers’ understandings and experiences of supervised learning events (SLEs), compared with workplace-based assessments (WPBAs), and their suggestions for developing SLEs. DESIGN: A narrative interview study based on 55 individual and 19 group interviews. SETTING: UK-wide study across three sites in England, Scotland and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: Using maximum-variation sampling, 70 Foundation trainees and 40 trainers were recruited, shared their understandings and experiences of SLEs/WPBAs and made recommendations for future practice. METHODS: Data were analysed using thematic and discourse analysis and narrative analysis of one exemplar personal incident narrative. RESULTS: While participants volunteered understandings of SLEs as learning and assessment, they typically volunteered understandings of WPBAs as assessment. Trainers seemed more likely to describe SLEs as assessment and a ‘safety net’ to protect patients than trainees. We identified 333 personal incident narratives in our data (221 SLEs; 72 WPBAs). There was perceived variability in the conduct of SLEs/WPBAs in terms of their initiation, tools used, feedback and finalisation. Numerous factors at individual, interpersonal, cultural and technological levels were thought to facilitate/hinder learning. SLE narratives were more likely to be evaluated positively than WPBA narratives overall and by trainees specifically. Participants made sense of their experiences, emotions, identities and relationships through their narratives. They provided numerous suggestions for improving SLEs at individual, interpersonal, cultural and technological levels. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide tentative support for the shift to formative learning with the introduction of SLEs, albeit raising concerns around trainees’ and trainers’ understandings about SLEs. We identify five key educational recommendations from our study. Additional research is now needed to explore further the complexities around SLEs within workplace learning. BMJ Publishing Group 2014-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4202004/ /pubmed/25324323 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005980 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Medical Education and Training
Rees, Charlotte E
Cleland, Jennifer A
Dennis, Ashley
Kelly, Narcie
Mattick, Karen
Monrouxe, Lynn V
Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title_full Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title_fullStr Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title_full_unstemmed Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title_short Supervised learning events in the Foundation Programme: a UK-wide narrative interview study
title_sort supervised learning events in the foundation programme: a uk-wide narrative interview study
topic Medical Education and Training
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4202004/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25324323
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005980
work_keys_str_mv AT reescharlottee supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy
AT clelandjennifera supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy
AT dennisashley supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy
AT kellynarcie supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy
AT mattickkaren supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy
AT monrouxelynnv supervisedlearningeventsinthefoundationprogrammeaukwidenarrativeinterviewstudy