Skip to main content

Table 4 Perceived utility of topics in didactic trainings. Items were rated on a 5-point scale (1 = very unimportant; 5 = very important)

From: Facilitators of high-quality teaching in medical school: findings from a nation-wide survey among clinical teachers

Item

Mean ± Standard Deviation

Effect size (Cohen’s d)

Junior physicians

Assistant professors

Overview of medical education in Germany

3.00 ± 1.29a

3.24 ± 1.24

−0.19

Specific characteristics of the home institution

3.74 ± 1.22

3.83 ± 1.16

 

Teaching session planning

3.78 ± 1.26

3.73 ± 1.20

 

Specific characteristics of teaching formats

4.04 ± 1.18

3.92 ± 1.19

 

Meeting the needs of a diverse student population

3.82 ± 1.39

3.71 ± 1.30

 

Educational psychology

3.80 ± 1.47

3.89 ± 1.42

 

Medical education research

3.39 ± 1.46

3.52 ± 1.48

 

Presentation skills

3.96 ± 0.67

4.05 ± 1.51

 

Designing practical examinations

3.88 ± 1.28

3.76 ± 1.38

 

Designing oral examinations

3.97 ± 1.32

3.97 ± 1.28

 

Designing written examinations

3.83 ± 1.30

3.83 ± 1.30

 
  1. a p < 0.05 for comparisons between junior physicians and assistant professors (independent t test). Effect size (Cohen’s d) reported when t test was significant