Tag: practical

Posted on

Struggle in the bubble – a prospective study on the effect of remote learning and distance education on confidence in practical surgical skills acquired during COVID-19 | BMC Medical Education

Struggle in the bubble – a prospective study on the effect of remote learning and distance education on confidence in practical surgical skills acquired during COVID-19 | BMC Medical Education

Demographics

A total of 232 out of 244 medical students completed both the baseline and follow-up questionnaire-based surveys, resulting in a response rate of 95{e4f787673fbda589a16c4acddca5ba6fa1cbf0bc0eb53f36e5f8309f6ee846cf}. Demographic data was comparable between the two cohorts (Table 1).

Table 1 Baseline comparison of the characteristics of participants belonging to the COV-19 and postCOV- 19 cohorts

Improvement in self-confidence for unit 1

First, it was evaluated whether the respective teaching methods in both cohorts resulted in an improvement in the self-confidence of students regarding their surgical skills. While analyzing unit 1 (sterile working), we found that both the COV-19 (Fig. 2A) and postCOV-19 (Fig. 2B) cohorts showed significant improvement in post-course confidence compared to pre-course confidence. This result was observed for all five subcategories of unit 1 (Table 2).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Self-assessment comparing pre- and post-course confidence of COV-19 and postCOV-19. Spider web graphs displaying the difference between pre- (full line) and post- (dotted line) course self-assessment. Unit 1 (sterile working): A (COV-19) + B (postCOV-19); unit 2 (knot tying and skin suturing): C (COV-19) + D (postCOV-19); unit 3 (history and physical): E (COV-19) + F (postCOV-19). COV-19 = cohort of summer semester 2021 (full COVID-19 restrictions), postCOV-19 = cohort of winter semester 2021/2022 (reduced COVID-19 restrictions)

Table 2 Self-assessment of pre- and post-course confidence of unit 1

Improvement in self-confidence for unit 2

While analyzing unit 2 (knot tying and skin suturing), we observed that both the COV-19 (Fig. 2C) and postCOV-19 (Fig. 2D) cohorts exhibited significant improvement in post-course confidence compared to pre-course confidence. This result was similar for all five subcategories of unit 2 (Table 3).

Table 3 Self-assessment of pre- and post-course confidence of unit 2

Improvement in self-confidence for unit 3

Upon analyzing unit 3 (history and physical), we identified that both, the COV-19 (Fig. 2E) and postCOV-19 (Fig. 2F) cohorts, revealed significant improvement in post-course confidence compared to pre-course confidence. This result was observed for all three subcategories of unit 3 (Table 4).

Table 4 Self-assessment of pre- and post-course confidence of unit 3

Having established that both the traditional interactive face-to-face hands-on courses and the newly developed interactive remote learning courses were able to significantly improve the confidence of medical students regarding basic surgical skills, it was necessary to determine the course that resulted in a higher difference between the pre- and post-course confidence and the subgroup of students that would benefit the most from a particular teaching method. Subgroup analysis was performed based on sex (male/female), age group (19–22 years/23–29 years/≥30 years), and prior surgical experience (with and without prior surgical experience) for evaluating the difference between the pre- and post-course self-assessment (Δ self-assessment).

Subgroup analysis

Sex

The cohorts were first stratified based on the sex (male or female) of the participants, and the subgroup that benefited the most from a particular learning method was determined. For unit 1, the mean Δ self-assessment in the COV-19 cohort was significantly higher in male students (1.96) than in female students (1.44) (p = 0.0003). However, in the postCOV-19 cohort, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly higher in female students (1.57) compared to male students (1.29) (p = 0.0372) (Fig. 3A).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Subgroup analysis comparing pre- and post-course self-assessment (Δ self-assessment). A subgroup (sex: male vs. female) analysis for differences in Δ self-assessment, B) subgroup (age: 19–22 years vs. 23–29 years vs. ≥ 30 years) analysis for differences in Δ self-assessment, C) subgroup (prior surgical experience: with vs. without surgical experience) analysis for differences in Δ self-assessment, D) analysis for differences in Δ self-assessment comparing COV-19 vs. postCOV-19. Data are presented as mean and compared using Student’s t-test or ANOVA. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Significance is indicated by the following symbols: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.00001, ns = not significant. COV-19 = cohort of summer semester 2021 (full COVID-19 restrictions), postCOV-19 = cohort of winter semester 2021/2022 (reduced COVID-19 restrictions)

For unit 2, the mean Δ self-assessment in the COV-19 cohort was significantly higher in male students (2.59) compared to female students (2.16) (p < 0.0001), whereas no significant difference between males (1.92) and females (2.01) was observed in the mean Δ self-assessment in the postCOV-19 cohort (p = 0.0813) (Fig. 3A).

Nonetheless, for unit 3, we found that the mean Δ self-assessment was comparable between the female and male groups in both cohorts (Fig. 3A).

Age

The two cohorts were stratified based on age, which resulted in three subgroups: 19–22, 23–29, and ≥ 30 years. For unit 1, we found that the mean Δ self-assessment in the COV-19 cohort was the highest for the participants in the age group of 23–29 years (mean Δ self-assessment = 19–22 years: 1.51; 23–29 years: 1.82; ≥30 years: 1.42). Furthermore, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly higher in students of ages 23–29 years compared to those in the age group of 19–22 years (p = 0.0234). However, no significant differences in the mean Δ self-assessment were observed between the subgroups 19–22 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.8443), as well as the subgroups 23–29 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.0761).

By contrast, the mean Δ self-assessment of unit 1 did not vary significantly between different age groups in the postCOV-19 (mean Δ self-assessment = 19–22 years: 1.58; 23–29 years: 1.33; ≥30 years: 1.23) cohort (Fig. 3B).

Considering unit 2, we determined that the youngest (19–22 years) subgroup exhibited the maximum improvement in self-assessment for the COV-19 and post-COV19 cohorts. In the COV-19 cohort, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly higher in the subgroup with participants aged 19–22 years compared to the subgroup with participants aged 23–29 years (p = 0.0017). However, there was no significant difference between the subgroups with participants aged 19–22 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.4096), as well as the subgroups with participants aged 23–29 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.5073).

In the postCOV-19 cohort, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly higher in the subgroup with participants aged 19–22 years compared to the subgroups with participants aged 23–29 years (p = 0.0020) and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.0017). In contrast, there was no significant difference observed between the mean Δ self-assessment of the subgroups with participants aged 23–29 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.2499) (Fig. 3B).

Upon analyzing unit 3, the mean Δ self-assessment in the COV-19 cohort was significantly higher in the youngest students (19–22 years) compared to the subgroup with participants aged 23–29 years (p = 0.0061) in COV-19. However, there was no significant difference in the mean Δ self-assessment between the participants aged 19–22 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.0934) and 23–29 years and ≥ 30 years (p = 0.9923).

Nonetheless, for unit 3, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly higher in the subgroup with participants aged ≥30 years compared to subgroups with participants aged 19–22 years (p = 0.0224) and 23–29 years (p = 0.0181) in the postCOV-19 cohort (mean Δ self-assessment = 19–22 years: 1.73; 23–29 years: 1.68; ≥30 years: 2.35). However, no significant difference was noted in the mean Δ self-assessment of subgroups with students aged 19–22 years and 23–29 years (p = 0.9332) in the postCOV-19 cohort (Fig. 3B).

Prior surgical experience

Lastly, the two cohorts were stratified based on prior surgical experience. Students without prior surgical experience showed a significantly higher improvement in their self-assessment of post-course confidence compared to pre-course confidence. This result was found for unit 1 and 2 in the COV-19 (unit 1 = mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 0.58; without surgical experience: 1.74; p < 0.0001; unit 2 = mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 1.65; without surgical experience: 2.14; p < 0.0001) and postCOV-19 cohorts (unit 1 = mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 0.77; without surgical experience: 1.57; p < 0.0001; unit 2 = mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 1.15; without surgical experience: 2.10; p < 0.0001).

However, for unit 3, we observed that the mean Δ self-assessment did not vary significantly between students with and without prior surgical experience in the COV-19 cohort (mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 1.21; without surgical experience: 1.09; p = 0.2242) but was significantly higher for students without surgical experience in the postCOV-19 cohort (mean Δ self-assessment with surgical experience: 1.19; without surgical experience: 1.89; p < 0.0001) (Fig. 3C).

To summarize, the mean Δ self-assessment was the highest in the young (19–22 years) male students without surgical experience in the COV-19 cohort and young (19–22 years) and elderly (≥30 years) female students without surgical experience in the postCOV-19 cohort.

Finally, we compared the mean Δ self-assessment of both cohorts using each unit. Both, the COV-19 (Δ self-assessment: 1.58) and postCOV-19 (Δ self-assessment: 1.46) cohorts showed comparable (p = 0.1485) results for unit 1. For unit 2, the mean Δ self-assessment was significantly (p < 0.0001) higher in the COV-19 cohort (Δ self-assessment: 2.26) compared to the postCOV-19 (Δ self-assessment: 1.98). In contrast, for unit 3, the Δ self-assessment was significantly (p < 0.0001) higher in the postCOV-19 cohort (Δ self-assessment: 1.76) compared to the COV-19 cohort (Δ self-assessment: 1.1) (Fig. 3D).

Posted on

New study reveals extent of practical and emotional support offered by teachers — ScienceDaily

A research survey of primary school teachers in England has emphasised the importance of the relationship between parents and primary schools during lockdown school closures, with teachers providing a range of practical and emotional support alongside academic assistance to parents to try and negate perceived disadvantages in home circumstances.

With schools closed from March 2020 until the end of the academic year and again from January 2021, pupils were taught online. This put an expectation on parents to shoulder some of the responsibility in ensuring pupils were engaged in their learning and to try and minimise some of the disadvantages faced by pupils from lower income families who may not have had access to the same learning equipment or facilities as others.

Academics from Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) led a team of researchers who surveyed 271 primary school teachers from across the country during June and July 2000, and also carried out follow-up interviews with a smaller cohort in April this year to compare the second round of school closures from January 2021.

Participants worked in schools with differing levels of pupil premiums, which is additional funding provided by the Government to schools based on the number of pupils in a school deemed to be at an economic or social disadvantage. Lower pupil premium schools had fewer children considered to be at a disadvantage, while higher pupil premium schools had more.

The vast majority (84{e4f787673fbda589a16c4acddca5ba6fa1cbf0bc0eb53f36e5f8309f6ee846cf}) of teachers felt some pupils had been disadvantaged by school closures due to their home circumstances.

The researchers found that all teachers provided resources for parents to use at home, either created by themselves or using other sources. However, while pupils from schools with a lower pupil premium number were significantly better able to access all resources than those from schools with higher pupil premium numbers, middle income families struggled to find the time to engage with home schooling, with many working from home in white collar professions during the pandemic.

The study highlights the broad range of support that primary teachers gave to children and their parents during the pandemic, not only academically, but also practically and emotionally. Teachers kept in touch with parents more regularly, either through online calls or home visits, and as a result felt they gained a greater understanding of children’s home lives, which helped build trust.

Many gave examples of ways they supported families through other means, such as organising collaborations with charities to provide breakfasts for children whose families were struggling to afford food, making up food hampers, and even providing loans. Some teachers provided specific sessions for parents to guide them through some of the teaching materials, or to boost their confidence.

Lead author Dr Sara Spear, Head of the School of Management at ARU, said: “The COVID-19 pandemic was a difficult and stressful time for many people, and for some families it caused, or exacerbated, socio-economic difficulties.

“Our results showed that parental participation in schooling in middle income families was predominantly impeded by parents’ work responsibilities, with one or both parents likely to be working, and long hours and high-pressured jobs leaving little time for supporting children’s home learning.

“This was exacerbated in the second closure period, with more parents working, and increased expectations for children’s learning. Only the richest families had access to resources, such as private tuition and intensive private schooling, that alleviated these pressures.

“It was clear from our research that a closer relationship between teachers and parents meant a greater understanding of the difficulties faced by some parents, and as a result teachers went above and beyond to try and make sure no child was left behind. Teachers are hopeful that this stronger relationship will lead to better engagement in future, with things like parents’ evenings being held online to encourage better attendance.

“In the event of future school closures, schools should consult with parents when determining any requirements for learning at home, to ensure that this is inclusive for the families in their community. Schools should pay particular attention to access to technology, and consider parents’ ability and capacity to participate in schooling.”