Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Teaching evaluations for process and content experts

From: A prospective randomized trial of content expertise versus process expertise in small group teaching

Item Process Experts Content Experts p value
Listened to learners 4.83 [4.80-4.85]* 4.68 [4.65-4.71] <.001
Encouraged learners to participate actively in discussion 4.76 [4.73-4.79] 4.62 [4.59-4.66] <.001
Expressed respect for learners 4.86 [4.84-4.88] 4.70 [4.67-4.73] <.001
Encouraged learners to bring up problems 4.79 [4.76-4.82] 4.64 [4.61-4.68] <.001
Called attention to time 4.61 [4.56-4.66] 4.45 [4.40-4.49] <.001
Avoided digressions 4.58 [4.53-4.62] 4.47 [4.42-4.51] <.01
Effectively dealt with disruptive students 4.74 [4.69-4.80] 4.61 [4.54-4.68] <.01
Stated goals/objectives of the session clearly and concisely 4.63 [4.58-4.67] 4.42 [4.38-4.46] <.001
Stated relevance of goals/objectives to learners 4.56 [4.51-4.60] 4.42 [4.38-4.46] <.001
Repeated goals and objectives periodically 4.43 [4.38-4.49] 4.26 [4.21-4.31] <.001
Used whiteboard or other visual aids 4.74 [4.70-4.78] 4.55 [4.51-4.59] <.001
Referred to relevant schemes for clinical presentations 4.68 [4.64-4.72] 4.53 [4.49-4.57] <.001
Provided ample opportunity for students to ask questions 4.83 [4.81-4.86] 4.70 [4.67-4.73] <.001
Helped students draw connections between the clinical presentation and relevant science/physiology/anatomy 4.76 [4.72-4.79] 4.65 [4.62-4.68] <.001
Overall, this preceptor was an effective small group facilitator 4.78 [4.74-4.81] 4.62 [4.58-4.65] <.001
  1. *Data presented as mean score on 5 point scale, followed by 95% confidence interval