From the Faculty of Pharmacy (M-L.T.), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada; Faculty of Medicine (A.L.), Laval University, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada; Copenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES) (P.D.), Center for Human Resources and Education, Capital Region of Denmark, Herlev, Denmark; Department of Public Health (P.D.), University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Quality and Health Technology (P.D.), University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway; Skillslab Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (J-J.R.), School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; and Department of Educational Development and Research (D.D.), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Simul Healthc. 2023 Dec 1;18(6):375-381. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000713. Epub 2023 Jan 22.
In simulation, students often observe their peers perform a task. It is still unclear how different types of instructional guidance can turn the observational phase into an active learning experience for novices. This mixed-method study aims to understand similarities and differences between use of collaboration scripts and checklists by observers in terms of cognitive load and perception of learning.
Second-year pharmacy students ( N = 162) were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 conditions when observing a simulation: collaboration scripts (heuristic to analyze in dyads while observing), checklists, both, or no guidance. We measured observers' intrinsic and extraneous cognitive load and self-perceived learning and conducted focus group interviews.
Intrinsic cognitive load was significantly lower for checklists (M = 3.6/10) than for scripts (M = 4.7/10) or scripts and checklists combined (M = 4.7/10). Extraneous cognitive load was significantly lower for checklists (M = 1.5/10) than for scripts combined with checklists (M = 2.6/10) or no guidance (M = 1.8/10). There was no statistical difference between conditions for self-perceived learning. Coding of focus group interviews revealed 6 themes on observers' perception of learning under different conditions of instructional guidance. Students explained that collaboration scripts felt more complex, whereas checklists were perceived as a simple fact-checking exercise. Observing the simulation, regardless of guidance, was a meaningful learning experience.
With or without guidance, observers are actively engaged with the simulation, but their effort differed depending on instructions. When choosing between checklists or collaboration scripts, educators should be guided by the type of simulation task.
在模拟教学中,学生通常会观察同伴执行任务。目前尚不清楚不同类型的教学指导如何将观察阶段转变为新手的主动学习体验。本混合方法研究旨在了解观察者在使用协作脚本和检查表时,在认知负荷和学习感知方面的异同。
将 162 名二年级药学专业学生随机分配到观察模拟时的 4 种条件之一:协作脚本(在观察时对双人进行分析的启发式方法)、检查表、两者兼用或无指导。我们测量了观察者的内在和外在认知负荷以及自我感知的学习情况,并进行了焦点小组访谈。
与脚本(M = 4.7/10)或脚本和检查表组合(M = 4.7/10)相比,检查表的内在认知负荷显著较低(M = 3.6/10)。检查表的外在认知负荷(M = 1.5/10)明显低于检查表与脚本组合(M = 2.6/10)或无指导(M = 1.8/10)。不同指导条件下自我感知的学习没有统计学差异。对焦点小组访谈的编码揭示了 6 个主题,涉及在不同教学指导条件下观察者对学习的感知。学生们解释说,协作脚本感觉更复杂,而检查表则被视为简单的事实核对练习。无论是否有指导,观察模拟都是一种有意义的学习体验。
无论是否有指导,观察者都积极参与模拟,但他们的努力因指导而异。在选择检查表或协作脚本时,教育者应根据模拟任务的类型进行指导。