Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Utrecht University, Trans 10, 3512 JK, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2022 Oct;27(4):965-988. doi: 10.1007/s10459-022-10122-w. Epub 2022 Jun 20.
Medical educators constantly make decisions on when and how to intervene. Current literature provides general suggestions about types of teacher interventions. Our study aims to specify that knowledge by describing in detail the actions teachers do when intervening, the interactional consequences of those actions, and how these relate to teacher roles in group discussions. We collected all first teacher interventions (n = 142) in 41 videorecorded group discussions on experiences from practice at the Dutch postgraduate training for General Practice. We analyzed the interventions using Conversation Analysis. First, we described the timing, manner, actions, and interactional consequences of each intervention. Next, we inductively categorized actions into types of actions. Finally, we analyzed the distribution of these types of actions over the group discussion phases (telling, exploration, discussion, conclusion). First teacher interventions were done at observably critical moments. Actions done by these interventions could be categorized as moderating, expert, and evaluating actions. Moderating actions, commonly done during the telling and exploration phase, are least directive. Expert and evaluator actions, more common in the discussion phase, are normative and thus more directive. The placement and form of the actions done by teachers, as well as their accounts for doing those, may hint at a teacher orientation to intervene as late as possible. Since the interventions are occasioned by prior interaction and responded to in different ways by residents, they are a collaborative interactional accomplishment. Our detailed description of how, when and with what effect teachers intervene provides authentic material for teacher training.
医学教育者经常需要决定何时以及如何进行干预。目前的文献提供了关于教师干预类型的一般建议。我们的研究旨在通过详细描述教师在干预时所采取的行动、这些行动的交互后果以及这些行动如何与教师在小组讨论中的角色相关联来具体说明这方面的知识。我们收集了荷兰全科医生研究生培训中关于实践经验的 41 个视频记录小组讨论中所有的第一次教师干预(n=142)。我们使用会话分析对干预进行了分析。首先,我们描述了每次干预的时机、方式、行动和交互后果。接下来,我们将行动归纳为不同类型的行动。最后,我们分析了这些类型的行动在小组讨论阶段(讲述、探索、讨论、结论)中的分布情况。第一次教师干预是在可观察到的关键时刻进行的。这些干预所采取的行动可以分为调节、专家和评估行动。在讲述和探索阶段经常采取的调节行动最不具指令性。在讨论阶段更常见的专家和评估行动更具规范性,因此更具指令性。教师所采取的行动的位置和形式,以及他们对采取这些行动的解释,可能暗示着教师倾向于尽可能晚地进行干预。由于干预是由先前的互动引发的,并被居民以不同的方式回应,因此它们是一种协作的交互成就。我们详细描述了教师如何、何时以及以何种效果进行干预,为教师培训提供了真实的素材。