Premium
SOARing Achievements: Do Medical Students Think Our New Teaching Strategy Achieved Its Goals?
Author(s) -
Gritton Cory Buenting,
Carmichael Heather,
Kondo Kimi,
Lee Lisa,
Royer Danielle
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.2020.34.s1.02287
Subject(s) - soar , medical education , quartile , psychology , percentile rank , likert scale , medicine , computer science , confidence interval , artificial intelligence , percentile , statistics , mathematics , developmental psychology
In 2018, the University of Colorado implemented Structured Obligatory Application & Review (SOAR) sessions designed around 11 specific goals associated with evidence‐based trends in medical education in order to improve the anatomy block. The sessions, spaced across the block, each included 4 rotations with small group work and hands‐on activities integrating clinical and anatomy content. Rotations included embryonic relationships with gross, anatomy in imaging & physical exam, surgical cases with cadaveric correlation, and team‐based learning of board‐style questions. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether SOAR successfully achieved its goals: peer‐to‐peer learning, self‐directed learning, identifying knowledge gaps, engaging review, long‐term retention, confidence in anatomy, connecting anatomy concepts, exam preparation, clinical relevance, and clinical application. In an IRB exempt study, 1 st year medical students (n=182) were invited to complete a paper survey during the last SOAR in 2019. The survey included 11 Likert items pertaining to stated SOAR goals. Previously, 1st‐year students in the 2018 pilot SOAR (n=184) were invited to complete an online survey after block completion. The 2018 survey included the same 11 items, plus two free response questions that were qualitatively analyzed for themes. The 2019 survey response rate was 81% (n=149), much greater than 2018 online response rate (31%, n=59). Analysis of 2019 responses revealed student agreement greater than 50% for all 11 SOAR goals. Strong achievement of a goal was determined from upper quartile (75–100%) agreement ratings, which was seen for 4 goals: providing clinical relevance (91%), applying anatomical knowledge to clinical situations (89%), identifying knowledge gaps (82%), and connecting anatomical concepts (78%). Goals were considered moderately achieved with agreement ratings in the next quartile (50–74%), with the remaining 7 SOAR goals within this designation: an engaging way to review anatomy (70%), self‐directed learning (69%), peer‐to‐peer teaching (68%), preparation for written examinations (67%), long‐term retention (57%), improving confidence in anatomy (52%), and preparation for practical exams (51%). Cohort comparison revealed no significant difference in responses between the pilot and subsequent year of SOAR implementation for each of the goals (Mann Whitney U tests, p>0.05). Overall, SOAR goals were strongly to moderately achieved based on student perceptions, with benefits perceived strongest in providing clinical relevance, clinical application of anatomy, knowledge gap identification, and providing an engaging review. This suggests that developing targeted, interactive, small group activities such as those used in SOAR may be a valuable evidence‐based approach to better integrate clinical and anatomical content in the modern pre‐clinical medical curriculum.