An exploration of metacognitive practices in medical educators

IF 5.2 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Andrew S. Cale, Margaret A. McNulty
{"title":"An exploration of metacognitive practices in medical educators","authors":"Andrew S. Cale,&nbsp;Margaret A. McNulty","doi":"10.1002/ase.2503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Metacognition is the ability to monitor and evaluate one's thoughts about learning and has been shown in some studies to improve the effectiveness of instructors. With dissection-based gross anatomy, instructors dynamically use their metacognition to monitor student learning and adapt their teaching at tableside. This study explored the metacognition of instructors as they taught in an anatomy course for allied health students. All instructors in a doctoral-level gross anatomy course at a single institution, including faculty, associate instructors (AIs), and teaching assistants (TAs), were invited to participate. At the start and end of the course, participating instructors completed pre- and post-questionnaires, which included the Teacher Metacognition Inventory (TMI), a 28-item survey that assesses metacognition as it relates to teaching. After labs, instructors completed reflective journals to provide deeper insight into their metacognition. Reflective journals were then thematically analyzed. Thirteen (52%) instructors participated in this study, including five faculty, three AI, and five TAs. Between the start and end of the course, total TMI score increased from 108.8 to 114.3 (<i>p</i> = 0.046). TAs exhibited the greatest change in total TMI score (Δ<sub>mean</sub> = +11.4) followed by faculty (Δ<sub>mean</sub> = +3.2) and AIs (Δ<sub>mean</sub> = −0.7). Several themes were also identified. For example, TAs were more internally focused on content mastery, whereas faculty were externally focused on interpersonal factors (e.g., inclusive language). These insights into the metacognition of anatomy instructors, though limited in reliability and generalizability, may inform how to best support their professional development. Novices may benefit from content reviews, while experienced instructors may benefit from inclusivity or communications training.</p>","PeriodicalId":124,"journal":{"name":"Anatomical Sciences Education","volume":"17 7","pages":"1485-1494"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ase.2503","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatomical Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ase.2503","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Metacognition is the ability to monitor and evaluate one's thoughts about learning and has been shown in some studies to improve the effectiveness of instructors. With dissection-based gross anatomy, instructors dynamically use their metacognition to monitor student learning and adapt their teaching at tableside. This study explored the metacognition of instructors as they taught in an anatomy course for allied health students. All instructors in a doctoral-level gross anatomy course at a single institution, including faculty, associate instructors (AIs), and teaching assistants (TAs), were invited to participate. At the start and end of the course, participating instructors completed pre- and post-questionnaires, which included the Teacher Metacognition Inventory (TMI), a 28-item survey that assesses metacognition as it relates to teaching. After labs, instructors completed reflective journals to provide deeper insight into their metacognition. Reflective journals were then thematically analyzed. Thirteen (52%) instructors participated in this study, including five faculty, three AI, and five TAs. Between the start and end of the course, total TMI score increased from 108.8 to 114.3 (p = 0.046). TAs exhibited the greatest change in total TMI score (Δmean = +11.4) followed by faculty (Δmean = +3.2) and AIs (Δmean = −0.7). Several themes were also identified. For example, TAs were more internally focused on content mastery, whereas faculty were externally focused on interpersonal factors (e.g., inclusive language). These insights into the metacognition of anatomy instructors, though limited in reliability and generalizability, may inform how to best support their professional development. Novices may benefit from content reviews, while experienced instructors may benefit from inclusivity or communications training.

Abstract Image

探索医学教育工作者的元认知实践。
元认知是一种监控和评估自己学习想法的能力,一些研究表明,元认知可以提高教师的教学效率。在以解剖为基础的大体解剖学教学中,教师可以动态地使用元认知来监控学生的学习情况,并在桌边调整他们的教学。本研究探讨了教师在为专职医疗学生讲授解剖课程时的元认知。本研究邀请了一所院校的博士级解剖学课程的所有讲师(包括教师、副讲师和助教)参加。在课程开始和结束时,参与的教师填写了前后问卷,其中包括教师元认知量表(TMI),这是一项包含 28 个项目的调查,用于评估与教学相关的元认知。实验结束后,教师们填写了反思日志,以便更深入地了解自己的元认知。然后对反思日志进行专题分析。13名(52%)教师参与了本研究,其中包括5名教师、3名人工智能和5名助教。从课程开始到结束,TMI 总分从 108.8 分上升到 114.3 分(p = 0.046)。助教的 TMI 总分变化最大(Δmean = +11.4),其次是教员(Δmean = +3.2)和助理教员(Δmean = -0.7)。还发现了几个主题。例如,助教更注重内在的内容掌握,而教师则更注重外在的人际因素(如包容性语言)。这些对解剖学教师元认知的见解虽然在可靠性和普遍性方面存在局限性,但可以为如何更好地支持他们的专业发展提供参考。新手可能会从内容审查中获益,而经验丰富的教师则可能会从包容性或沟通培训中获益。
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
Anatomical Sciences Education
Anatomical Sciences Education Anatomy/education-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
39.70%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Anatomical Sciences Education, affiliated with the American Association for Anatomy, serves as an international platform for sharing ideas, innovations, and research related to education in anatomical sciences. Covering gross anatomy, embryology, histology, and neurosciences, the journal addresses education at various levels, including undergraduate, graduate, post-graduate, allied health, medical (both allopathic and osteopathic), and dental. It fosters collaboration and discussion in the field of anatomical sciences education.
×
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