Quantification of training in educational methodology among teachers on the degree course in medicine: a pilot study | BMC Medical Education

0
Quantification of training in educational methodology among teachers on the degree course in medicine: a pilot study | BMC Medical Education

The study population consisted of 121 members of university teaching staff, who completed the questionnaire.

Sex

Of the 121 members of teaching staff who took part, 80 were men (66.12%) and 41 were women (33.88%). Regarding the sex variable, no statistically significant differences were found between men and women regarding the number qualified as doctors, accreditation by evaluation agencies, number of six-year terms in research, or number of five-year terms served in teaching activities. Regarding management posts and clinical activity, significant differences were found (p = 0.032), whereby the posts of dean and vice-dean had only ever been held by men and 65.85% of women had never held any management post (Fig. 1). No statistical dependency was detected between the age and sex of the participants (p = 0.938), so age is discarded as a confounding variable when interpreting these results.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Management posts held by teaching staff and clinical activity in relation to sex (p = 0.032 and p = 0.003, respectively)

Regarding healthcare activities and attachment to clinics, significant differences were found (p = 0.003) between men and women. More men were involved in healthcare activities (63.75%) and attached to clinics (50%) than women (34.14% and 26.83%, respectively). As for training in teaching methods, no significant differences were found between the sexes but 63.75% of men and 77.77% of women had received no regulated training in teaching methods. Twenty-two men and nine women did not take part in teaching innovation projects. As for the production of teaching materials, 63 men and 28 women had developed teaching materials. Twelve men and four women had received awards for teaching innovation. No significant differences between men and women were found in training received in: ICT (48 men, 25 women); E-learning (39 men, 20 women); virtual environments (27 men, 16 women); PBL (30 men, 13 women); and debriefing (10 men, 5 women). However, 87.60% of the participants had received no training in debriefing (Fig. 2). As for training in clinical simulation, significant differences were found between the sexes (p = 0.019); 33.75% of men had received some training but only 14.63% of women.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Proportion of male vs. female teaching staff who had received training in clinical simulations (p = 0.019) and attachment to clinics (p = 0.003)

Age

Eighty-three teachers (68.59%) were aged over 45 years and 38 (31.41%) under 45. Of those aged over 45, 80 were qualified doctors, as were 30 of those under 45 (p = 0.004). In the older group, 67.47% had completed six-year terms in research, while among those under 45, 36.83% had done so (p = 0.002); none had completed five or more six-year terms. Regarding management posts held, staff aged over 45 had held more of these positions, as well as the posts of dean and vice-dean, while 76.31% of younger staff members had never held management posts, with statistically significant difference (p = 0.002). No significant differences were found between age groups in engagement in healthcare activity and clinical attachment.

No significant differences were found between the age groups in regulated training in teaching methods received, although 63.15% of those under 45 had received no training of this type. No significant differences were found in participation in teaching innovation projects (71 older and 29 younger than 45), or in the elaboration of teaching materials (64 older and 27 younger than 45). As for prizes/awards received for teaching innovation, significant differences were found (p = 0.002), whereby 16 older teachers had received awards, but no younger staff member had received one.

Regarding training in specific teaching methods, no significant differences were found between the age groups for: ICT (52 older and 21 younger than 45), E-learning (20 older and 20 younger than 45); virtual environments (30 older and 13 younger than 45). Significant differences were found for training in clinical simulation (p < 0.001): 30 of those over 45 had received training but only three aged under 45. Training in PBL and debriefing did not show differences between the groups, but both age groups exhibited low percentages (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Management posts held by teaching staff and clinical activity in relation to age (p = 0.002), teaching innovation awards (p = 0.002) and training in clinical simulation (p < 0.001)

Academic qualifications

Of all the teaching staff surveyed, 87 had degrees in medicine (71.90%), while 34 (28.10%) had other degree qualifications. There was observed a detectable association in the academic qualifications, both in relation to age (“Medicine group” tend to be older than “Other qualifications group”, p < 0.001) and in relation to sex (the proportion of men and women tends to be more unbalanced in “Medicine group” when compared to “Other qualifications group”, p < 0.001). There were no differences between holding the title of “Doctor,” in other words those with degrees in medicine, and staff members with other qualifications. So, most teaching staff members were Doctors. Over half (56.32%) of those with the degree in medicine were accredited by National Agency for Evaluation and Accreditation (ANECA), as were 88.23% of those with other degrees (with statistically significant difference: p < 0.001) (Fig. 4). The number of six-year terms in research and five-year terms in teaching were similar between staff members holding the degree in medicine and those with other degrees. Management posts were held by both teachers with degrees in medicine and those with other qualifications. More Doctors were involved in healthcare activities or were attached to clinics (51), while none of the staff members with other degrees were attached to clinics (p < 0.001).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Teaching access accreditation (p < 0.001) and attachment to clinics (p < 0.001) by staff members with the degree in medicine vs. those with other degree qualifications

More teachers with other degree qualifications had undergone regulated training in teaching methods than those with the degree in medicine, with statistically significant difference (p = 0.039) (Fig. 5). In the same way, there was more participation in teaching innovation projects by those with degrees other than medicine, particularly in the role of project director (p < 0.001).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Regulated training in teaching methods (p = 0.039) and participation in teaching innovation projects by staff members with the degree in medicine vs. those with other degree qualifications (p = 0.0006)

With regard to developing teaching materials, no significant differences were found between doctors and those with other degrees; this was the same for the numbers in receipt of awards/prizes for teaching innovation. As for training in specific teaching methods no significant differences were found between teachers with degrees in medicine and those with other degree qualifications for ICT (49 with the degree in medicine, 24 with other degrees), or E-learning (39 with the degree in medicine, 20 with other degrees). Significant differences were found between the two groups, whereby teachers with degrees other than medicine had received more training in virtual environments than those with the degree in medicine, while the reverse was true for training in clinical simulation received, so that more doctors had received training than staff members with other degrees (p < 0.001) (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6
figure 6

Training in virtual environments (p = 0.019) and clinical simulation (p < 0.001) received by teachers with the degree in medicine vs. those with other degree qualifications

As for training in PBL and debriefing, no significant differences were found. Over a third (35.63%) of teachers with the degree in medicine had received training in PBL compared with 35.29% of those with other degrees. Regarding debriefing, 12.64% of doctors and 11.76% of teachers with other degrees had undergone training.

link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *