课堂之外:教学式继续教育中面对面和虚拟主动学习技术的德尔菲研究。

IF 1.6 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Yemisi O Jones, Kristen Timmons, Rebecca Kolb, Lisa E Herrmann, Laura Werts, Melissa Klein, Jennifer O'Toole
{"title":"课堂之外:教学式继续教育中面对面和虚拟主动学习技术的德尔菲研究。","authors":"Yemisi O Jones, Kristen Timmons, Rebecca Kolb, Lisa E Herrmann, Laura Werts, Melissa Klein, Jennifer O'Toole","doi":"10.1097/CEH.0000000000000607","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite evidence supporting active learning techniques to enhance learning, they are seldom used during large-group continuing education (CE) sessions. This project sought to describe which active learning techniques are acceptable, feasible, and with which learners are likely to engage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Active learning techniques derived from a literature review were rated for two rounds by two Delphi panels, one composed of medical education experts (n = 10) and the other of CE attendees (n = 12). Each technique received five ratings: experts rated appropriateness for use in large-group didactic CE and feasibility for in-person and virtual use, and attendees rated their likelihood to engage in-person and virtually.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 30 active learning techniques, 13 (43%) received the highest ratings on all 5 measures. The remainder of the techniques did not achieve consensus on at least one measure. Only two techniques reached consensus for not being appropriate for large-group didactic CE.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We provide consensus evidence for the feasibility, appropriateness, and likelihood to engage for a variety of active learning techniques. This list can serve as a guide for their implementation in large-group didactic education and as a starting point for future study.</p>","PeriodicalId":50218,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond the Lecture: A Delphi Study of In-Person and Virtual Active Learning Techniques in Didactic Continuing Education.\",\"authors\":\"Yemisi O Jones, Kristen Timmons, Rebecca Kolb, Lisa E Herrmann, Laura Werts, Melissa Klein, Jennifer O'Toole\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CEH.0000000000000607\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite evidence supporting active learning techniques to enhance learning, they are seldom used during large-group continuing education (CE) sessions. This project sought to describe which active learning techniques are acceptable, feasible, and with which learners are likely to engage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Active learning techniques derived from a literature review were rated for two rounds by two Delphi panels, one composed of medical education experts (n = 10) and the other of CE attendees (n = 12). Each technique received five ratings: experts rated appropriateness for use in large-group didactic CE and feasibility for in-person and virtual use, and attendees rated their likelihood to engage in-person and virtually.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 30 active learning techniques, 13 (43%) received the highest ratings on all 5 measures. The remainder of the techniques did not achieve consensus on at least one measure. Only two techniques reached consensus for not being appropriate for large-group didactic CE.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>We provide consensus evidence for the feasibility, appropriateness, and likelihood to engage for a variety of active learning techniques. This list can serve as a guide for their implementation in large-group didactic education and as a starting point for future study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50218,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000607\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000607","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:尽管有证据支持主动学习技术可以提高学习效果,但在大群体继续教育(CE)课程中很少使用。这个项目试图描述哪些主动学习技术是可接受的、可行的,以及学习者可能参与的。方法:通过两个德尔菲小组对来自文献综述的主动学习技术进行两轮评分,其中一个小组由医学教育专家(n = 10)组成,另一个小组由CE与会者(n = 12)组成。每种技术都有5个等级:专家评估了在大群体教学CE中使用的适当性和面对面和虚拟使用的可行性,与会者评估了他们面对面和虚拟参与的可能性。结果:在30种主动学习技巧中,13种(43%)在所有5项指标中获得最高评分。其余的技术至少在一项措施上没有达成共识。只有两种技术达成了不适合大群体教学CE的共识。讨论:我们为各种主动学习技术的可行性、适当性和可能性提供了一致的证据。这一列表可以作为在大群体教学教育中实施的指南,并作为未来研究的起点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond the Lecture: A Delphi Study of In-Person and Virtual Active Learning Techniques in Didactic Continuing Education.

Introduction: Despite evidence supporting active learning techniques to enhance learning, they are seldom used during large-group continuing education (CE) sessions. This project sought to describe which active learning techniques are acceptable, feasible, and with which learners are likely to engage.

Methods: Active learning techniques derived from a literature review were rated for two rounds by two Delphi panels, one composed of medical education experts (n = 10) and the other of CE attendees (n = 12). Each technique received five ratings: experts rated appropriateness for use in large-group didactic CE and feasibility for in-person and virtual use, and attendees rated their likelihood to engage in-person and virtually.

Results: Out of 30 active learning techniques, 13 (43%) received the highest ratings on all 5 measures. The remainder of the techniques did not achieve consensus on at least one measure. Only two techniques reached consensus for not being appropriate for large-group didactic CE.

Discussion: We provide consensus evidence for the feasibility, appropriateness, and likelihood to engage for a variety of active learning techniques. This list can serve as a guide for their implementation in large-group didactic education and as a starting point for future study.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
85
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Continuing Education is a quarterly journal publishing articles relevant to theory, practice, and policy development for continuing education in the health sciences. The journal presents original research and essays on subjects involving the lifelong learning of professionals, with a focus on continuous quality improvement, competency assessment, and knowledge translation. It provides thoughtful advice to those who develop, conduct, and evaluate continuing education programs.
×
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