Purpose
In problem-based learning performance
differences between basic science (BS) and clinical (CL) facilitators is not
well studied. In a PBL course at our university pairs of faculty facilitators
(one clinician, one basic scientist) were assigned to student groups to maximize
integration of basic and clinical science. This study asks: do students evaluate
basic science and clinical faculty differently when they teach side by side?
Methods
Online questionnaires were used to
survey 188 students about their faculty facilitators immediately after they
completed each of three serial PBL cases. Overall satisfaction was measured
using a 1-7 scale, and yes/no responses were gathered from closed questions
describing faculty performance.
Results
First year students rated basic
science and clinical facilitators the same, but second year students rated the
clinicians higher overall. First year students rated basic scientists higher in
their ability to understand the limits of their own knowledge. Second year
students rated the clinicians higher in several content expertise-linked areas:
preparedness, promotion of in-depth understanding, and ability to focus the
group, and down-rated the basic scientists for demonstrating over-specialized
knowledge. Students’ overall ratings of individual faculty best correlated with
the qualities of stimulation, focus, and preparedness, but not with
overspecialization, excessive interjection of his/her opinions, and
encouragement of psychosocial issue discussion.
Conclusion
When taught by paired BS and CL PBL facilitators, students in year one rate basic
science and clinical PBL faculty equally, while second year rate clinicians more
highly overall. The second year difference may be explained by perceived
differences in content expertise.