Cargando…
Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method
Written feedback is often overly positive, nonspecific, and difficult to interpret. Learner satisfaction with written feedback is low and obtaining written feedback that encourages self-reflection is challenging. Improving feedback quality is laborious and only modestly effective. APPROACH: The auth...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33735121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004046 |
_version_ | 1784575475304103936 |
---|---|
author | Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel Sullivan, Amy Beltran, Christine Baker, Keith |
author_facet | Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel Sullivan, Amy Beltran, Christine Baker, Keith |
author_sort | Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel |
collection | PubMed |
description | Written feedback is often overly positive, nonspecific, and difficult to interpret. Learner satisfaction with written feedback is low and obtaining written feedback that encourages self-reflection is challenging. Improving feedback quality is laborious and only modestly effective. APPROACH: The authors developed the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) method to improve learner satisfaction with, and reflection on, existing written feedback. The method pairs a learner and coach to methodically identify themes in the learner’s written feedback. Themes occurring more frequently or less frequently than typical offer areas for reflection, as they may identify learners’ relative strengths or weaknesses. The method was introduced at the Massachusetts General Hospital in 2017 during program director (PD) meetings with anesthesiology residents. In 2018, resident satisfaction was measured (1 to 5 Likert-type questions, 1 = “not at all satisfied,” 5 = “extremely satisfied”) for 4 feedback sources, 2 related to the LEAF method (PD meetings, written feedback) and 2 unrelated (verbal feedback, mentor feedback). Residents’ comments were qualitatively assessed to explore the impact on self-reflection. OUTCOMES: Residents who had participated in a LEAF session (n = 54), compared with those who had not (n = 11), reported higher satisfaction with written feedback (mean 3.1 versus 2.5, d = 0.53, P = .03) and PD meeting feedback (mean 3.8 versus 2.8, d = 0.80, P = .03). There were no significant differences between groups for satisfaction with feedback unrelated to the LEAF method. Qualitative analysis of comments suggested that residents found the method useful for providing holistic self-assessment, facilitating goal setting, uncovering blind spots, and improving feedback interpretation. NEXT STEPS: Next steps should include studies determining if the association between increased learner satisfaction with written feedback and the LEAF method is causal, and whether this feedback process changes learners’ subsequent behaviors. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8475777 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84757772021-09-28 Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel Sullivan, Amy Beltran, Christine Baker, Keith Acad Med Innovation Reports Written feedback is often overly positive, nonspecific, and difficult to interpret. Learner satisfaction with written feedback is low and obtaining written feedback that encourages self-reflection is challenging. Improving feedback quality is laborious and only modestly effective. APPROACH: The authors developed the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) method to improve learner satisfaction with, and reflection on, existing written feedback. The method pairs a learner and coach to methodically identify themes in the learner’s written feedback. Themes occurring more frequently or less frequently than typical offer areas for reflection, as they may identify learners’ relative strengths or weaknesses. The method was introduced at the Massachusetts General Hospital in 2017 during program director (PD) meetings with anesthesiology residents. In 2018, resident satisfaction was measured (1 to 5 Likert-type questions, 1 = “not at all satisfied,” 5 = “extremely satisfied”) for 4 feedback sources, 2 related to the LEAF method (PD meetings, written feedback) and 2 unrelated (verbal feedback, mentor feedback). Residents’ comments were qualitatively assessed to explore the impact on self-reflection. OUTCOMES: Residents who had participated in a LEAF session (n = 54), compared with those who had not (n = 11), reported higher satisfaction with written feedback (mean 3.1 versus 2.5, d = 0.53, P = .03) and PD meeting feedback (mean 3.8 versus 2.8, d = 0.80, P = .03). There were no significant differences between groups for satisfaction with feedback unrelated to the LEAF method. Qualitative analysis of comments suggested that residents found the method useful for providing holistic self-assessment, facilitating goal setting, uncovering blind spots, and improving feedback interpretation. NEXT STEPS: Next steps should include studies determining if the association between increased learner satisfaction with written feedback and the LEAF method is causal, and whether this feedback process changes learners’ subsequent behaviors. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-03-16 2021-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8475777/ /pubmed/33735121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004046 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Association of American Medical Colleges. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Innovation Reports Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel Sullivan, Amy Beltran, Christine Baker, Keith Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title | Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title_full | Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title_fullStr | Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title_full_unstemmed | Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title_short | Doing More With Written Feedback: Improving Learner Satisfaction and Reflection With the LEAF (Learner-Engaged Analysis of Feedback) Method |
title_sort | doing more with written feedback: improving learner satisfaction and reflection with the leaf (learner-engaged analysis of feedback) method |
topic | Innovation Reports |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475777/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33735121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004046 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saddawikonefkadaniel doingmorewithwrittenfeedbackimprovinglearnersatisfactionandreflectionwiththeleaflearnerengagedanalysisoffeedbackmethod AT sullivanamy doingmorewithwrittenfeedbackimprovinglearnersatisfactionandreflectionwiththeleaflearnerengagedanalysisoffeedbackmethod AT beltranchristine doingmorewithwrittenfeedbackimprovinglearnersatisfactionandreflectionwiththeleaflearnerengagedanalysisoffeedbackmethod AT bakerkeith doingmorewithwrittenfeedbackimprovinglearnersatisfactionandreflectionwiththeleaflearnerengagedanalysisoffeedbackmethod |