Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships: influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative

E. A. van Hell, J.B. Kuks, A.N. Raat, M T van Lohuizen, Janke Cohen-Schotanus

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Several authors assume that the supervisor's role, observation of behaviour and students' active participation are important factors in the instructiveness of feedback. Aim: This study aims to provide empirical evidence for these expectations. Methods: For two weeks, 142 clerks from eight hospitals recorded for each individual feedback event: who provided the feedback, whether the feedback was based on observation of behaviour, who initiated the feedback moment and the perceived instructiveness of the feedback. Data were analysed with multilevel techniques. Results: The perceived instructiveness of feedback provided by specialists and residents did not differ significantly. However, both were perceived to be more instructive than feedback from nursing and paramedical staff (βspecialists = 0.862, p <0.01; βresidents = 0.853, p <0.01). Feedback on behaviour that had been directly observed was reported to be more instructive than feedback on behaviour that had not been observed (βobserved = 0.314, p <0.001). Feedback which stemmed from student initiative or a joint initiative was experienced to be more instructive than feedback which ensued from the supervisor's initiative (βstudent = 0.441, p <0.01; βjoint = 0.392, p <0.01). Conclusions: The expectations concerning the influence of observation and student initiative on the instructiveness of feedback were confirmed in this empirical study. Expected differences in instructiveness between feedback from specialists and residents were not confirmed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)45-50
JournalMedical teacher
Volume31
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Observation
Students
student
resident
Nursing Staff
nursing
Joints
staff
participation
event

Keywords

  • higher education

Cite this

van Hell, E. A., Kuks, J. B., Raat, A. N., van Lohuizen, M. T., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2009). Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships: influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative. Medical teacher, 31(1), 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802144294
van Hell, E. A. ; Kuks, J.B. ; Raat, A.N. ; van Lohuizen, M T ; Cohen-Schotanus, Janke. / Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships : influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative. In: Medical teacher. 2009 ; Vol. 31, No. 1. pp. 45-50.
@article{79ec0226a2b547238632996202aefdd5,
title = "Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships: influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative",
abstract = "Background: Several authors assume that the supervisor's role, observation of behaviour and students' active participation are important factors in the instructiveness of feedback. Aim: This study aims to provide empirical evidence for these expectations. Methods: For two weeks, 142 clerks from eight hospitals recorded for each individual feedback event: who provided the feedback, whether the feedback was based on observation of behaviour, who initiated the feedback moment and the perceived instructiveness of the feedback. Data were analysed with multilevel techniques. Results: The perceived instructiveness of feedback provided by specialists and residents did not differ significantly. However, both were perceived to be more instructive than feedback from nursing and paramedical staff (βspecialists = 0.862, p <0.01; βresidents = 0.853, p <0.01). Feedback on behaviour that had been directly observed was reported to be more instructive than feedback on behaviour that had not been observed (βobserved = 0.314, p <0.001). Feedback which stemmed from student initiative or a joint initiative was experienced to be more instructive than feedback which ensued from the supervisor's initiative (βstudent = 0.441, p <0.01; βjoint = 0.392, p <0.01). Conclusions: The expectations concerning the influence of observation and student initiative on the instructiveness of feedback were confirmed in this empirical study. Expected differences in instructiveness between feedback from specialists and residents were not confirmed.",
keywords = "higher education, hoger onderwijs",
author = "{van Hell}, {E. A.} and J.B. Kuks and A.N. Raat and {van Lohuizen}, {M T} and Janke Cohen-Schotanus",
year = "2009",
doi = "http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590802144294",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "45--50",
journal = "Medical teacher",
issn = "0142-159X",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",

}

van Hell, EA, Kuks, JB, Raat, AN, van Lohuizen, MT & Cohen-Schotanus, J 2009, 'Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships: influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative', Medical teacher, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590802144294

Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships : influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative. / van Hell, E. A.; Kuks, J.B.; Raat, A.N.; van Lohuizen, M T; Cohen-Schotanus, Janke.

In: Medical teacher, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2009, p. 45-50.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Instructiveness of feedback during clerkships

T2 - influence of supervisor, observation and student initiative

AU - van Hell, E. A.

AU - Kuks, J.B.

AU - Raat, A.N.

AU - van Lohuizen, M T

AU - Cohen-Schotanus, Janke

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Background: Several authors assume that the supervisor's role, observation of behaviour and students' active participation are important factors in the instructiveness of feedback. Aim: This study aims to provide empirical evidence for these expectations. Methods: For two weeks, 142 clerks from eight hospitals recorded for each individual feedback event: who provided the feedback, whether the feedback was based on observation of behaviour, who initiated the feedback moment and the perceived instructiveness of the feedback. Data were analysed with multilevel techniques. Results: The perceived instructiveness of feedback provided by specialists and residents did not differ significantly. However, both were perceived to be more instructive than feedback from nursing and paramedical staff (βspecialists = 0.862, p <0.01; βresidents = 0.853, p <0.01). Feedback on behaviour that had been directly observed was reported to be more instructive than feedback on behaviour that had not been observed (βobserved = 0.314, p <0.001). Feedback which stemmed from student initiative or a joint initiative was experienced to be more instructive than feedback which ensued from the supervisor's initiative (βstudent = 0.441, p <0.01; βjoint = 0.392, p <0.01). Conclusions: The expectations concerning the influence of observation and student initiative on the instructiveness of feedback were confirmed in this empirical study. Expected differences in instructiveness between feedback from specialists and residents were not confirmed.

AB - Background: Several authors assume that the supervisor's role, observation of behaviour and students' active participation are important factors in the instructiveness of feedback. Aim: This study aims to provide empirical evidence for these expectations. Methods: For two weeks, 142 clerks from eight hospitals recorded for each individual feedback event: who provided the feedback, whether the feedback was based on observation of behaviour, who initiated the feedback moment and the perceived instructiveness of the feedback. Data were analysed with multilevel techniques. Results: The perceived instructiveness of feedback provided by specialists and residents did not differ significantly. However, both were perceived to be more instructive than feedback from nursing and paramedical staff (βspecialists = 0.862, p <0.01; βresidents = 0.853, p <0.01). Feedback on behaviour that had been directly observed was reported to be more instructive than feedback on behaviour that had not been observed (βobserved = 0.314, p <0.001). Feedback which stemmed from student initiative or a joint initiative was experienced to be more instructive than feedback which ensued from the supervisor's initiative (βstudent = 0.441, p <0.01; βjoint = 0.392, p <0.01). Conclusions: The expectations concerning the influence of observation and student initiative on the instructiveness of feedback were confirmed in this empirical study. Expected differences in instructiveness between feedback from specialists and residents were not confirmed.

KW - higher education

KW - hoger onderwijs

UR - http://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/instructiveness-feedback-during-clerkships-influence-supervisor-observation-student-initiative

U2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590802144294

DO - http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01421590802144294

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 45

EP - 50

JO - Medical teacher

JF - Medical teacher

SN - 0142-159X

IS - 1

ER -