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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Saddawi-Konefka, Daniel, Sullivan, Amy, Beltran, Christine, Baker, Keith
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