Search

Background: Team-Based Learning (TBL) has garnered considerable attention in education research. To consolidate the existing evidence, we conducted an umbrella review with four objectives: (a) to identify TBL review characteristics, (b) to synthesize findings from previous reviews regarding TBL effectiveness and outcomes, (c) to determine which student groups benefit most, and (d) to identify the most and least researched elements., Methods: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology was followed: [1] Search strategy and literature search [2] Screening and Study Selection [3] Assessment of methodological quality [4] Data collection, and [5] Data summary. We utilized Endnote, Excel, and MAXQDA for efficient project management and analyzing data., Results: Analyzing twenty-three reviews spanning from 2013 to 2024, we found a peak in TBL research in 2022 including more than 312 unique primary studies involving more than 63,987 participants. Notably, the United States and China accounted for over 61% of the total primary articles focused on students from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and dentistry. Evidence supports the superiority of TBL in enhancing cognitive outcomes. However, findings related to retention are mixed. Insufficient evidence exists to draw robust conclusions when comparing TBL with other active learning methods. TBL demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of clinical performance and engagement. Non-technical skills show mixed results. Notably, TBL positively impacts self-study, learning ability, decision-making, and emotional intelligence. Faculty experiences reveal an initial increase in workload, but generally hold positive attitude. Faculty development remain limited in duration and scope. Freshmen, academically weaker students, undergraduates, Chinese female students, and nursing students appear to benefit most from TBL. Team formation and size are the most frequently studied elements., Conclusion: TBL holds promise for improving learning outcomes, but ongoing investigation is essential to maximize its impact in diverse educational contexts. This umbrella review underscores the need for further research in specific areas i.e. effective pre-class learning methods and faculty workload., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Several models and frameworks have been developed in the past two decades to explain motivation regulation in different fields. However, a comprehensive framework that explains the dimensions of metamotivation in medical education is lacking. This study aims to address this gap by presenting a conceptual framework to understand metamotivation in medical education., Method: This study was conducted at Tehran University of Medical Sciences in 2022-2023. We applied Crawford's guidance on developing a conceptual framework via collecting data from three sources: experience, literature, and theory. We developed the initial draft of the conceptual framework by identifying gaps in existing models. A panel of experts reviewed the draft and provided feedback on the framework's generation, explanation, and argumentation. The final model was designed in the form of a graphical presentation., Findings: The study's conceptual framework clearly distinguishes between motivational challenges and motivational problems, and outlines four phases that explain each phase's importance, components, and implementation process. The first phase focuses on promoting metamotivational knowledge among learners. In the second phase, learners face motivational challenges and aim to manage them optimally to prevent motivational problems. The third phase occurs when a motivational problem arises, and learners use motivational regulation strategies to resolve it. In the fourth and final phase, learners use psychological skills to stabilize and strengthen the metamotivational process., Conclusion: This study's conceptual framework focuses specifically on the context of medical education to provide guidance for future research and interventions on metamotivation. By presenting this framework, we aim to capture the attention of researchers toward the topic of metamotivation and encourage further exploration of its dimensions.

Introduction: The field of medical education has seen a growing interest in lecture free curriculum. However, it comes with its own set of challenges and obstacles. In this article, we aim to identify the prerequisites, facilitators, challenges, and barriers of lecture-free curriculum in medical education and examine their interrelationships using interpretive structural modeling (ISM) technique., Methods: In this mixed-method study initially, we performed a scoping review and semi-structured interviews and determined the main prerequisites, facilitators, challenges, and barriers of lecture-free curriculum in medical education using qualitative content analysis approach. The interrelationships among these components were investigated using ISM. Therefore, self-interactive structural matrices were formed, initial and final reachability matrices were achieved, and MICMAC analysis was conducted to classify the factors., Results: Finally, two ISM models of prerequisites and facilitators with 27 factors in 10 levels and challenges and obstacles with 25 factors in eight levels were developed. Each of the models was divided into three parts: key, strategic, and dependent factors. 'Providing relevant evidence regarding lecture free curriculum' emerged as the most important prerequisite and facilitator, and 'insufficient support from the university' was identified as the most critical barrier and challenge., Conclusions: The study highlights the significant importance of lecture-free curriculum in medical education and provides insights into its prerequisites, facilitators, challenges, and barriers. The findings can be utilized by educational managers and decision-makers to implement necessary changes in the design and implementation of lecture-free in medical education, leading to more effective improvements in the quality and success of education.

Background: Education in the health sciences is transitioning to a student-centered approach that has impacted all components of educational institutions: classroom design, faculty training, selection of learners and faculty., Activity: Using metaphor analyses, this study investigates the effects on instructor beliefs and values about teaching by having a series of professional development workshops in either a traditional lecture hall or in a collaborative/engaged learning-designed classroom. At the conclusion of the series, both sets of participants were invited to make a free-hand drawing of their "conception" of teaching and label the drawing that represents the conception. Drawings and metaphors were analyzed by non-study raters, and all metaphors were categorized into one of three domains: teacher-centered, learner-centered, learner-driven., Results: Faculty who completed the series inside a collaborative learning classroom perceived their roles primarily in the learner-centered domains 37 (59.67%), whereas those that completed it in the lecture hall perceived their roles as primarily teacher-centered 62 (84.93%)., Discussion: The authors discuss the implications for faculty development during this transition., Competing Interests: Conflict of InterestThe authors declare no competing interests., (© The Author(s) under exclusive licence to International Association of Medical Science Educators 2024.)

This AMEE guide seeks to improve the metamotivational knowledge of health professions educators as well as students. We present key models and frameworks of Metamotivation, identify several motivation regulation strategies and their measurement tools, and propose applications for health professions education (HPE). Since our work is grounded on evidence from the field, we include new findings about motivation regulation to encourage further exploration. Although much of the research on Metamotivation has been done outside the field of medical education, we share our six years of research experience and findings within the field to inspire others to replicate and expand.

Introduction: Anki is an application that capitalizes upon the techniques of spaced repetition and is increasingly utilized by medical students for examination preparation. This study examines the impact of Anki usage in a medical school curriculum on academic performance. Secondary objectives analyzed individual Anki utilization and a qualitative assessment of Anki use., Methods: A cohort-control study was conducted at Boonshoft School of Medicine. One hundred thirty first-year medical students were enrolled in an Anki utilization training program from July 2021 to September 2021. Training included educational Anki courses and subsequent survey data collection over Anki usage. Data variables included all course final examinations, the Comprehensive Basic Science Exam (CBSE), individual Anki user statistics, nationally standardized exams scores, and Qualtrics surveys on student perceived ease of use., Results: Seventy-eight students reported using Anki for at least one of the exams, and 52 students did not use Anki for any exam. Anki users scored significantly higher across all four exams: Course I (6.4%; p  < 0.001); Course II (6.2%; p  = 0.002); Course III (7.0%; p  = 0.002); and CBSE (12.9%; p  = 0.003). Students who reported higher dependency on Anki for studying performed significantly better on the Course I, II, and CBSE exams., Conclusion: Anki usage may be associated with an increase in standardized examination scores. This supports Anki as an evidence-based spaced repetition and active retrieval learning modality for medical school standardized examinations. There was little correlation between its specific statistical markers and examination performance. This is pertinent to physicians and medical students alike as the learning and preservation of biomedical knowledge is required for examinations and effective clinical care., Competing Interests: Competing InterestsThe authors declare no competing interests., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: In metamotivational monitoring, students try to identify the declined motivational component in order to regulate their motivation. There is scarcity of evidence on which motivational components are targeted by the medical students when they use each motivational regulation strategies. This study aims were identifying motivational components in motivational regulation process, developing a measurement tool and, testing the predictive relationship between the motivational components and motivational regulation strategies., Methods: This exploratory sequential design mixed method study is part of a project has been started from 2018 with medical students at Tehran University of Medical Science. First, in a qualitative study conducting a semi-structured in-depth interview, the motivational components were explored. The interviews continued until saturation of data. Then, in a psychometric study the validity and reliability evidence of questionnaire obtained. In the quantitative study, applying the convenience sampling method, 508 students completed the questionnaires. Predictive relation between the motivational regulation strategies and motivational components was assessed utilising Structural Equation Modelling. Path coefficients, T-Value, and R 2 index were reported by SmartPLS software., Results: In the Exploratory Factor Analysis of Motivational Components Questionnaire (MCQ), 6 factors were discovered that explained 74% of the total variance. All paths in seven models of SEM showed a T-Value above 1.96 that means there is a significant correlation between all strategies and components. In examining the predictive relationships, each of the four components of self-efficacy, intrinsic value, self-relevant value and promotion value were specifically predicted by two motivational regulation strategies., Conclusions: Evidence of validity and reliability of the MCQ indicates that this questionnaire can be used in medical education contexts. Health Profession Educators can improve the academic motivation of students by identifying one or more declined motivational component and teaching specific motivational regulation strategies. It is recommended to hold training courses on motivational regulation strategies for medical school faculty, study-skills advisors, and students., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Metamotivation is a process that students use to monitor their motivational states to reach their academic goals. To date, few studies have addressed the ways that medical students manage their motivational states. This study aim to identify the motivational strategies of medical students as they use the metamotivational process to monitor and control their motivational states., Materials and Methods: This qualitative study uses directed content analysis of the narrative responses of 18 medical students to draft an in-depth and semistructured interview protocol which were conducted through WhatsApp due to social distance restrictions of COVID-19. Data were collected, encoded, and analyzed using deductive content analysis approach descripted by Elo and Kyngäs., Results: Seven main themes were extracted as the motivational strategies of medical students including "regulation of value," "regulation of situational interest," "self-consequating," "environmental structuring," "efficacy management," "regulation of relatedness," and "regulation of situational awareness." In this study by identifying new strategies, we provide a broader framework of metamotivational strategies in the field of the progression of learners in medical education., Conclusion: Medical students use a variety of strategies to regulate their academic motivation. To sustain and improve the motivation of medical students, identifying and strengthening metamotivational strategies is the first step., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2022 Journal of Education and Health Promotion.)

Introduction: Understanding medical students' motivational regulation strategies is particularly salient to monitor their quality and quantity of motivation. This study aims to develop and validate a questionnaire to measure metamotivational strategies in medical students., Methods: A Metamotivational Strategies in Medical Students Questionnaire (MSMQ) was developed by using the seven steps presented in 'developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87'. First, in a systematic search, related articles extracted and nine instruments were identified. Then, in a qualitative study, the metamotivational strategies of medical students were explained. In the next step, the identified strategies were conceptually compared with previous studies, and the MSMQ items were developed. Finally, expert validation, cognitive interviews, exploratory factor analysis, and reliability analysis were conducted., Results: The MSMQ consisted of 7 factors and 28 items. CVI >0.79 in terms of relevance, clarity, and simplicity. In exploratory factor analysis, seven subscales explained 67.5% of the variance. Cronbach's alpha = 0.89. ICC = 0.76 - 0.87., Conclusion: The MSMQ has reasonable psychometric properties, with adequate internal reliability and strong evidence of structural validity. However, further validation in other settings applying various psychometric methods is recommended.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Peer Instruction (PI) is a vibrant instructional strategy, used successfully for over two decades in undergraduate physics and mathematics courses. It has had limited use and few publications in medical education. This 12 TIPS provides a focused review on the evidence supporting its use in higher education and rationale for its wider adoption in medical education. The authors detail important steps for its implementation with large classes. Based on several years of experience with PI in a US allopathic medical school, they feel that PI attends to core principles from the science of learning and provides students and faculty with immediate feedback on learning. It is also adaptable to on-line synchronous administration., (Copyright: © 2020 Parmelee D et al.)

In this AMEE Guide we propose that instruction in health sciences education transform to 'lecture-free.' We present rationale for this proposal, guidance on approaches and strategies to achieve the goal, likely challenges, and what we consider the value-added outcomes. We are supported by a confluence of factors: advances in the science of learning and the learning of science and clinical reasoning, incontrovertible evidence that active and engaged learning strategies have better outcomes, current and emerging technology infrastructure in and out of the classroom, and best-practice instructional design.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. This set of Tips is written to make the best use of an Engaged Learning Classroom (ELC), which some may refer to as the 'flipped classroom.' Strategies for the ELC include Team-Based Learning (TBL), Peer Instruction (PI), Case-Based Learning (CBL). Our focus will be on the design and implementation of the out-of-class phase for any ELC activity since this is as important as the in-class phase, but often neglected. Experience has shown that the quality of learning from the ELC is highly dependent on the preparation before, and follow-up to the class session. The instructor's designation of material (written, audio-visual, other potential learning resources and activities) and guidance on how to approach these materials generates engagement and enhances learning. We provide important contextual information on the learners of today (Generation Z), highlights of current learning theory applicable to self-directed learning, and the unique ingredients for the linkage between out-of-class and in-class learning that makes for the fullest student engagement. Each Tip addresses frequent questions by both instructors and learners who are embarking on the ELC and/or lessons that we have learned from the literature and designing, facilitating, and evaluating sessions., (Copyright: © 2019 Alizadeh M et al.)

The purpose of this study was to formulate evidence-based recommendations on whether to deliver the team-based learning (TBL)-designed clinical pharmacology course at the American University of Beirut Faculty of Medicine (AUBFM) during the third year instead of the fourth and final year of the medical curriculum. Between June 2010 and May 2011, AUBFM offered the course to both classes simultaneously to compare their performance. The findings of this endeavor supported the introduction of the course during the third year, first because fourth-year students did not outperform third-year students despite having the advantage of an additional year of clinical experience, and second, third-year teams seemed more likely to develop into better functioning teams. The findings also suggested that simultaneous delivery of TBL sessions to both third- and fourth-year teams was less favorably recommended because of the varying learning pace of both student groups.

Team-based learning™ (TBL) is an instructional strategy developed in the business school environment in the early 1990s by Dr Michaelsen who wanted the benefits of small group learning within large classes. In 2001, a US federal granting agency awarded funds for educators in the health sciences to learn about and implement the strategy in their educational programs; TBL was put forward as one such strategy and as a result it is used in over 60 US and international health science professional schools. TBL is very different from problem-based learning (PBL) and other small group approaches in that there is no need for multiple faculty or rooms, students must come prepared to sessions, and individual and small groups of students (teams) are highly accountable for their contributions to team productivity. The instructor must be a content-expert, but need not have any experience or expertise in group process to conduct a successful TBL session. Students do not need any specific instruction in teamwork since they learn how to be collaborative and productive in the process. TBL can replace or complement a lecture-based course or curriculum.

Background: Measurement of the quality of team processes in medical education, particularly in classroom-based teaching settings, has been limited by a lack of measurement instruments. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop and test an instrument to measure the quality of team interactions., Method: The authors created 30 items and reduced these to 18 items using factor analysis. They distributed the scale to 309 second-year medical students (RR = 95%) in a course that used teams and measured internal consistency, validity, and differences in scores between teams., Results: Cronbach's alpha for the scale was 0.97. Team ratings were variable, with a mean score of 95.7 (SD 8.5) out of 108. Team Performance Scale (TPS) scores correlated inversely with the spread of peer evaluation scores (r = -0.38, P = .003). Differences between teams were statistically significant (P < .001, eta = 0.33)., Conclusions: The TPS was short, had evidence of reliability and validity, and exhibited the capacity to distinguish between teams. This instrument can provide a measure of the quality of team interactions. More work is needed to provide further evidence of validity and generalizability.

Purpose: Team-based learning (TBL) has been successfully used in non-medical curricula, but its effectiveness in medical education has not been studied extensively. We evaluated the impact of TBL on the academic performance of Year 2 medical students at Wright State University by comparing this active learning strategy against a traditional method of case-based group discussion (CBGD)., Methods: A prospective crossover design assigned 83 Year 2 medical students to either CBGD or TBL for 8 pathology modules in the systems-based curriculum. The effectiveness of both learning methods was assessed by performance on pathology-based examination questions contained in end-of-course examinations. The highest and lowest academic quartiles of students were evaluated separately. Students' opinions of both methods were surveyed., Results: No significant differences in whole group performance on pathology-based examination questions were observed as a consequence of experiencing TBL versus CBGD. However, students in the lowest academic quartile showed better examination performance after experiencing TBL than CBGD in 4 of 8 modules (P = 0.035). Students perceived that the contributions of peers to learning were more helpful during TBL than CBGD (P = 0.003)., Conclusion: This study demonstrates that TBL and CBGD are equally effective active learning strategies when employed in a systems-based pre-clinical pathology curriculum, but students with lower academic performance may benefit more from TBL than CBGD.