Learning in groups: Teamshaping in the teaching of medical psychology

Kropiunigg, Ulrich; Pucher, Ingeborg; Weckenmann, Martin

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01166.x

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This quote, commonly attributed to Henry Ford, nicely illustrates the emphasis that has been placed on teamwork within many areas of society, including business, politics, and education. The health sciences are not an exception to this rule, as evidenced by both the inclusion of a collaborator role within the CanMEDs 2000 report published by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, 1 and a pair of articles included in this issue that describe attempts to develop intra‐ and interprofessional team‐building opportunities for students 2 , 3 . Ford's quote, however, also illustrates one of the problems that this emphasis on teamwork has created – the tendency to treat teamwork as a goal in and of itself.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, the deleterious effects of teamwork are not limited to those situations in which the teams are composed of individuals from varying disciplines. Also in this issue, Kropiunigg, Pucher, and Weckenmann report using the Group Climate Questionnaire in an attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of Teamshaping (defined as small group learning in which attention is turned to the personal experiences of the group) compared to `traditional' teaching of medical psychology as a way to induce (in third year medical students) the ability to work in teams 2 . The reliability and validity of this questionnaire were not reported, but it was intended to be a measure of the relationship among group members along three dimensions: Commitment, conflict, and avoidance/dependence.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Teamwork during education: the whole is not always greater than the sum of the parts

Eva¹

2002

Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Teamwork during education: the whole is not always greater than the sum of the parts

Eva¹

2002

Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Accreditation and supervisory bodies in medical education also advocate building the teamwork capabilities of medical students (AMC, 2012;Frank, Snell, & Sherbino, 2014;General Medical Council, 2015;Liaison Committee on Medical Education, 2011). Teamwork training can be integrated within a small-group instructional approach (Kropiunigg, 2002;Kropiunigg, Pucher, & Weckenmann, 2002;Sobral, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritising the key behaviours that enhance the quality of collaborative learning by medical students: A modified Delphi study

Iqbal

Velan

O’Sullivan

et al. 2018

FoHPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Medical education has transitioned to require more active student learning, including self-directed and collaborative approaches. Although there are many advantages to collaborative small-group environments, learning in this setting is not always effective. One potential factor is that behaviours that are key to the success of small-group collaborative learning in medical education are yet to be clearly defined. In this study, we aimed to identify and prioritise behaviours that are relevant to individual students effective collaborative learning in small groups. Method:A two-round modified-Delphi approach was used to identify student behaviours that positively influenced the success of small-group collaborative-learning environments. In Round 1, the panel members were asked to rate the impact of 15 student behaviours on two subscales: (1) enhancing the quality of learning and (2) fostering a collaborative environment. The top 10 behaviours identified were utilised for Round 2, in which the panel members were asked to rank the behaviours based on the magnitude of their positive impact on students' quality of learning.Results: Collaborative group behaviours were prioritised in Round 2, and the top six behaviours were selected for the design of a user-friendly educational intervention for medical students. The key behaviours identified were preparation by the student, involvement in discussion, engagement in learning, listening skills, sharing views and voicing opinions, reflecting on feedback and responding appropriately.

show abstract

“…A majority of students ranked the role of the faculty member as least important in the group process of small-group learning [ 6 ], and several researchers have found that students prefer peer-led groups [ 6 - 10 , 20 - 22 ]. Student behavior and group functioning appears to be influenced by their perception of the learning situation [ 23 ], which suggests that students might do better in small group situations led by peers. Group functioning, in turn, is correlated with academic performance [ 19 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The perceived effects of faculty presence vs. absence on small-group learning and group dynamics: a quasi-experimental study

Hoffman

Wilkinson

Xu³

et al. 2014

BMC Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMedical education increasingly relies on small-group learning. Small group learning provides more active learning, better retention, higher satisfaction, and facilitates development of problem-solving and team-working abilities. However, less is known about student experience and preference for different small groups teaching models. We evaluated group educational dynamics and group learning process in medical school clerkship small group case-based settings, with a faculty member present versus absent.MethodsStudents completed surveys after cases when the faculty was present (“in”) or absent (“out”) for the bulk of the discussion. 228 paired surveys (114 pairs) were available for paired analysis, assessing group dynamics, group learning process, student preference, and participation through self-report and self-rating of group behaviors tied to learning and discussion quality.ResultsRatings of group dynamics and group learning process were significantly higher with the faculty absent vs. present (p range <0.001 to 0.015). Students also reported higher levels of participation when the faculty member was absent (p = 0.03). Students were more likely to express a preference for having the faculty member present after “in” case vs. “out” case discussions. (p < 0.001). There was no difference in reported success of the case discussion after “in” vs. “out” cases (p = 0.67).ConclusionsStudent groups without faculty present reported better group dynamics, group learning processes, and participation with faculty absent. Students reported that they feel somewhat dependent on faculty, especially when the faculty is present, though there was no significant difference in students reporting that they obtained the most they could from the discussion of the case after both “in” and “out” cases.

show abstract

Learning in groups: Teamshaping in the teaching of medical psychology

Cited by 7 publications

References 4 publications

Teamwork during education: the whole is not always greater than the sum of the parts

Teamwork during education: the whole is not always greater than the sum of the parts

Prioritising the key behaviours that enhance the quality of collaborative learning by medical students: A modified Delphi study

The perceived effects of faculty presence vs. absence on small-group learning and group dynamics: a quasi-experimental study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About