gms | German Medical Science

4th Research in Medical Education (RIME) Symposium 2015

19.03-21.03.2015, München

Patterns in students’ self-regulated learning behavior in the clinic

Meeting Abstract

Suche in Medline nach

  • corresponding author presenting/speaker Joris Berkhout - Academic Medical Center-University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

4th Research in Medical Education (RIME) Symposium 2015. München, 19.-21.03.2015. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2015. DocRD21

doi: 10.3205/15rime66, urn:nbn:de:0183-15rime668

Veröffentlicht: 12. März 2015

© 2015 Berkhout.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen. Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden. Lizenz-Angaben siehe http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.


Gliederung

Text

Introduction: Good self-regulated learning is important because it has a positive effect on learning [1]. In the clinical workplace the importance of good self-regulated learning skills is even more evident because students are expected to take control of their own learning process [2]. Little research has studied students’ self-regulated learning in the clinical environment [3], [4]. To support good self-regulated learning in individual students it would be useful to see if, and if so what, patterns can be identified in students’ self-regulated learning behavior in the clinic.

Therefore our research question was: what patterns in students’ self-regulated learning behavior in the clinic can be identified, and what are its most important features?

Methods: We chose to use a Q-methodology for our study, which encompasses both qualitative and quantitative features [5]. The Q-methodology is developed for the systematic investigation of people’s viewpoints regarding a specific topic, by having them sort statements. The Q-methodology clusters individuals with a similar perspective together to create patterns, rather than clustering questions together to create dimensions.

75 clerks from one university in the Netherlands enrolled in this study, they were in various stages of their undergraduate education and were enrolled in various clerkships. A digital system was used to conduct this study. Participants were asked to sort statements on a “totally disagree” – “totally agree” scale, according to a fixed, bell-shaped distribution. 67 statements representing all aspects of self-regulated learning were used, which were distilled from a previous interview study on clinical students’ self-regulated learning.

Results: This study is currently being conducted, no results can be given yet, however we estimate that we have the results before the PhD/MME Research Day takes place.


References

1.
Bjork RA, Dunlosky J, Kornell N. Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:417–444. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823 Externer Link
2.
Teunissen PW, Westerman M. Opportunity or threat: the ambiguity of the consequences of transitions in medical education. Med Educ. 2011;45(1):51–59. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03755.x Externer Link
3.
Woods NN, Mylopoulos M, Brydges R. Informal self-regulated learning on a surgical rotation: uncovering student experiences in context. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2011;16(5):643–653. DOI: 10.1007/s10459-011-9285-4 Externer Link
4.
Brydges R, Butler DL. A reflective analysis of medical education research on self-regulation in learning and practice. Med Educ. 2012;46(1):71–79. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04100.x Externer Link
5.
Watts S, Stenner P. Doing Q Methodological Research: Theory, Method and Interpretation. New York: Sage; 2012.