Roman Hari - PhD project-data for study 3

<B>Title</B><BR>Comparing Practical Skills Teaching by Near-Peers and Faculty<BR><BR>
<B>Purpose</B><BR>
Near-peer teaching is a vital teaching resource in most medical schools, but we know little about the comparative benefits of near-peers and faculty teaching or the learning mechanisms that underlie them. This study explored near-peers’ and students’ perceptions of differences between the way near-peers and faculty teach practical skills.<BR><BR>
<B>Methods</B><BR>
Using qualitative methodology, the authors conducted 4 focus groups with near-peers (n=22) and 4 focus groups with students (n=26, years 3-6) at the University of Bern, Switzerland, between Sept-Dec 2022. All participants recently participated in near-peer skills training. Vignettes of typical teaching situations guided the focus group discussions. The reflexive thematic analysis was both inductive and deductive; Cognitive Apprenticeship teaching methods informed the deductive analysis.<BR><BR>
<B>Results</B><BR>
Near-peers were perceived to establish a safer learning climate than faculty, lowering the threshold to ask questions. Near-peer teaching was oriented toward the formal curriculum and students’ learning needs, resulting in more tailored explanations focused on exam-relevant content. Faculty oriented their teaching towards clinical practice, which helped students transition to clinical practice but could overwhelm novice students. Faculty better stimulated students to think critically about unanswered questions and how to fill their competence gaps.<BR><BR>
<B>Conclusions</B><BR>
Skills teaching by near-peers and faculty differed in teaching climate and orientation. Near-peers saw students as “learners,” focused on the learning climate and on students’ needs. Faculty saw students as “future physicians” and facilitated the transition from curricular learning to clinical practice. Curricular design should capitalize on the complementary benefits of near-peer and faculty skills instructors, and seek to get the best of both worlds.<BR><BR>
<B>Explanation of all the instruments used in the data collection (including phrasing of items in surveys)</B><BR>
Baseline Questionnaire for near-peers and students, focus group guide using vignettes<BR><BR>
<B>Explanation of the data files: what data is stored in what file?</B><BR>
The study contained 8 transcrips of focus groups and one questionnaire with variants for near-peers and students:<BR>
Folder name -.> Description<BR>
Baseline Questionnaire_Students -> Questions in Baseline questionnaire for students (in German)<BR>
Baseline Questionnaire_Peers -> Questions in Baseline questionnaire for Peers (in German)<BR>
Participant Information -> Contains results from Baseline questionnaire<BR>
Transcripts FG 1-8 -> Transcripts of the 8 focus groups<BR><BR>
<B>In case of qualitative data: description of the structure of the data files</B><BR>
The Transcript files contain the original focus group interview data in German. The Participant information sheet contain demographic data of the focus group participants<BR><BR>