Preceptor Training: Evaluation of an On-line Educational Module to Improve Preceptor Feedback

IF 0.5 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Karina Gonzalez, Matthew Drescher, Elizabeth Neil, Lindsey Eberman
{"title":"Preceptor Training: Evaluation of an On-line Educational Module to Improve Preceptor Feedback","authors":"Karina Gonzalez, Matthew Drescher, Elizabeth Neil, Lindsey Eberman","doi":"10.46743/1540-580x/2023.2301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Effective feedback delivery is critical to behavior modification and skill improvement in novice learners and athletic training programs often use annual training to teach preceptors to develop feedback skills. The purpose of this research project was to evaluate the effectiveness of an on-line asynchronous educational module for improving feedback delivery. Method: We used a single cohort, repeated measures design (pre, post, post-post) and an eAuthoring tool (Softchalk©) and online assessments (Qualtrics® Provo, UT) to evaluate the educational module. Preceptors (n=351) from 17 post-baccalaureate programs began the study; 48 completed all 3 assessments. We delivered a content validated lesson and assessments using various learning theories including video demonstrations with paired reflections. The desired outcome was to enhance the knowledge of effective feedback characteristics to be used in practice. The pre-test assessed self-reported feedback behaviors on a Likert Scale and knowledge (score=25). The immediate post-test reassessed feedback knowledge. At least 8 weeks following completion of the module, participants were asked to reassess feedback delivery behaviors. Throughout the process, participants provided a definition of “effective feedback” scored on 7 key criteria for effective feedback delivery. Descriptive statistics and paired t-tests were used to analyze the data and significance was set at Pa-priori. Results: Significant improvements (P-3.298 P=.001, Cohen’s d=.889). There were no other significant differences between pre-test and follow-up behaviors (P>.05), as participants generally agreed they performed effective feedback behaviors (mode=4) at both time points. Conclusions: Behaviors regarding effective feedback were not changed over the long-term, which may have been a result of the method of performance feedback. Preceptor training is both a requirement and a need in effective athletic training clinical education. Future research should aim to identify mechanisms to improve preceptor feedback and confirm preceptor perceptions through student evaluations.","PeriodicalId":45065,"journal":{"name":"Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46743/1540-580x/2023.2301","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Effective feedback delivery is critical to behavior modification and skill improvement in novice learners and athletic training programs often use annual training to teach preceptors to develop feedback skills. The purpose of this research project was to evaluate the effectiveness of an on-line asynchronous educational module for improving feedback delivery. Method: We used a single cohort, repeated measures design (pre, post, post-post) and an eAuthoring tool (Softchalk©) and online assessments (Qualtrics® Provo, UT) to evaluate the educational module. Preceptors (n=351) from 17 post-baccalaureate programs began the study; 48 completed all 3 assessments. We delivered a content validated lesson and assessments using various learning theories including video demonstrations with paired reflections. The desired outcome was to enhance the knowledge of effective feedback characteristics to be used in practice. The pre-test assessed self-reported feedback behaviors on a Likert Scale and knowledge (score=25). The immediate post-test reassessed feedback knowledge. At least 8 weeks following completion of the module, participants were asked to reassess feedback delivery behaviors. Throughout the process, participants provided a definition of “effective feedback” scored on 7 key criteria for effective feedback delivery. Descriptive statistics and paired t-tests were used to analyze the data and significance was set at Pa-priori. Results: Significant improvements (P-3.298 P=.001, Cohen’s d=.889). There were no other significant differences between pre-test and follow-up behaviors (P>.05), as participants generally agreed they performed effective feedback behaviors (mode=4) at both time points. Conclusions: Behaviors regarding effective feedback were not changed over the long-term, which may have been a result of the method of performance feedback. Preceptor training is both a requirement and a need in effective athletic training clinical education. Future research should aim to identify mechanisms to improve preceptor feedback and confirm preceptor perceptions through student evaluations.
导师制培训:评估在线教育模块以改善导师制反馈
目的:有效的反馈传递对新手学习者的行为矫正和技能提高至关重要,运动训练项目经常使用年度培训来教领训者发展反馈技能。本研究项目的目的是评估在线异步教育模块在改善反馈传递方面的有效性。方法:我们采用单队列、重复测量设计(前后、前后)和eauthororing工具(Softchalk©)和在线评估(Qualtrics®Provo, UT)来评估教育模块。来自17个本科后项目的导师(n=351)开始了这项研究;48人完成全部3项评估。我们提供了内容验证的课程和评估使用各种学习理论,包括视频演示与成对的反思。期望的结果是提高在实践中使用的有效反馈特性的知识。前测以李克特量表评估自我报告的反馈行为和知识(得分=25)。测试后立即重新评估反馈知识。模块完成至少8周后,参与者被要求重新评估反馈传递行为。在整个过程中,参与者提供了“有效反馈”的定义,并根据有效反馈的7个关键标准打分。采用描述性统计和配对t检验对数据进行分析,显著性设为先验。结果:显著改善(P = 3.298)。0.001, Cohen’s d=.889)。在测试前和随访行为之间没有其他显著差异(P> 0.05),因为参与者普遍认为他们在两个时间点都执行了有效的反馈行为(mode=4)。结论:长期来看,有效反馈的行为并没有改变,这可能是绩效反馈方法的结果。训练指导员是有效的运动训练临床教育的必要条件和需要。未来的研究应致力于通过学生评价来确定改善导师反馈和确认导师感知的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
25.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
35 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信