Does group size matter during collaborative skills learning? A randomised study

Abstract

Background Collaborative skills learning in the form of dyad learning compared with individual learning has been shown to lead to non‐inferior skills retention and transfer. However, we have limited knowledge on which learning activities improve collaborative skills training and how the number of collaborators may impact skills transfer. We explored the effects of skills training individually, in dyads, triads or tetrads on learning activities during training and on subsequent skills transfer. Methods In a randomised, controlled study, participants completed a pre‐post‐transfer‐test set‐up in groups of one to four. Participants completed 2 hours of obstetric ultrasound training. In the dyad, triad and tetrad group participants took turns actively handling the ultrasound probe. All performances were rated by two blinded experts using the Objective Structured Assessment of Ultrasound Skills (OSAUS) scale and a Global Rating Scale (GRS). All training was video recorded, and learning activities were analysed using the Interactive‐Constructive‐Active‐Passive (ICAP) framework. Results One hundred one participants completed the simulation‐based training, and ninety‐seven completed the transfer test. Performance scores improved significantly from pre‐ to post‐test for all groups (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.55). However, group size did not affect transfer test performance on OSAUS scores (p = 0.13, ηp2 = 0.06) or GRS scores (p = 0.23, ηp2 = 0.05). ICAP analyses of training activities showed that time spent on non‐learning and passive learning activities increased with group size (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.31), whereas time spent on constructive and interactive learning activities was constant between groups compared with singles (p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.72). Conclusion Collaborative skills learning in groups of up to four did not impair skills transfer despite less hands‐on time. This may be explained by a compensatory shift towards constructive and interactive learning activities that outweigh the effect of shorter hands‐on time.

Academy of Clinical Essentials

“…Smaller clinical groups with 4 to 6 ACE students compared with 6 to 8 students in a traditional clinical group permitted students to have more hands-on learning opportunity and time with the clinical instructors. Noerholk and colleagues 8 found that although learning group size does not significantly impact skills transfer, students in larger group sizes had as little as 25% of hands-on time as those in smaller groups. Likewise, as learning group size increased, the time spent in passive learning increased.…”

State of the art: Simulation in der Ultraschallausbildung

“…Einer gynäkologischen Studie an transvaginalen Simulatoren zufolge konnten Gruppen mit vier Lernenden pro Gerät vergleichbare Erfolge erzielen wie Lerngruppen zu zweit oder dritt pro Simulationsplatz [118]. Die relativ geringere aktive Untersuchungszeit wurde dabei durch vermehrte konstruktive und interaktive Phasen aufgewogen.…”

Validity evidence supporting clinical skills assessment by artificial intelligence compared with trained clinician raters

“…Previous studies using similar assessments of ultrasound skills have shown good generalisation between contexts with reliability estimates that correspond to those obtained in our study. 24,26,[32][33][34]…”