Premium
Maturational differences in undergraduate medical students’ perceptions about feedback
Author(s) -
MurdochEaton Deborah,
Sargeant Joan
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
medical education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.776
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1365-2923
pISSN - 0308-0110
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04291.x
Subject(s) - perception , credibility , medical education , psychology , focus group , context (archaeology) , peer feedback , qualitative property , medicine , computer science , paleontology , marketing , neuroscience , machine learning , political science , law , business , biology
Medical Education 2012: 46: 711–721 Context Although medical students receive varied feedback throughout their training programmes, research demonstrates that they frequently perceive it as insufficient. However, supervisors tend to perceive that it is adequate. Students’ responses to, and use of, feedback are not clearly understood. The purposes of this study were to investigate how medical students recognise, respond to and utilise feedback, and to determine whether there are maturational differences in understandings of the role of feedback across academic years in medical school. Methods This was a mixed‐methods study collecting qualitative (focus group and open‐ended questionnaire items) and quantitative (questionnaire) data across the 5 years of an undergraduate programme. Results A total of 68 students participated in 10 focus groups. The questionnaire response rate was 46% (564/1233). Data analysis investigated the students’ perceptions of feedback and explored patterns of responses across the continuum of undergraduate medical school stages. Maturational differences among the year cohorts within the programme emerged in three general areas: (i) student perceptions of the purpose of feedback; (ii) student recognition of feedback, and (iii) student perceptions regarding the credibility of feedback providers. Conclusions Junior students generally perceived the receiving of feedback as a passive activity and preferred positive feedback that confirmed their progress and provided reassurance. More senior students viewed feedback as informing their specific learning needs and personal development. They valued immediate informal verbal feedback and feedback from peers and others, as well as that from senior teachers. Exploring students’ progressive degrees of engagement with feedback and its relationship with self‐esteem are subjects for further study.