Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVaughan, B
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-17T03:58:40Z
dc.date.available2020-11-17T03:58:40Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-07
dc.identifierpii: 10.1186/s12909-020-02278-z
dc.identifier.citationVaughan, B. (2020). Clinical educator self-efficacy, self-evaluation and its relationship with student evaluations of clinical teaching. BMC MEDICAL EDUCATION, 20 (1), https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02278-z.
dc.identifier.issn1472-6920
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/251659
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: In a whole-of-system approach to evaluation of teaching across any degree, multiple sources of information can help develop an educators' understanding of their teaching quality. In the health professions, student evaluations of clinical teaching are commonplace. However, self-evaluation of teaching is less common, and exploration of clinical educators' self-efficacy even less so. The aim of the study was to evaluate how a clinical educator's self-evaluation of teaching intersects with their self-efficacy, to ascertain if that matches student evaluation of their teaching. This information may assist in facilitating targeted professional development to improve teaching quality. METHODS: Clinical educators in the osteopathy program at Victoria University (VU) were invited to complete: a) self-evaluation version of the Osteopathy Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (OCTQ); and b) the Self-Efficacy in Clinical Teaching (SECT) questionnaire. Students in the VU program completed the OCTQ for each of the clinical educators they worked with during semester 2, 2017. RESULTS: Completed OCTQ and SECT were received from 37 clinical educators. These were matched with 308 student evaluations (mean of 6 student ratings per educator). Three possible educator cohorts were identified: a) high clinical eductor self-OCTQ with low student evaluation; b) low clinical educator self-evaluation and high student evaluations; and, c) no difference between self- and student evaulations. Clinical educators in the first cohort demonstrated significantly higher SECT subscale scores (effect size > 0.42) than their colleagues. Age, gender, teaching qualification, and years practicing or years as a clinical educator were not associated with clinical educator OCTQ scores or the SECT subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted professional development directed towards fostering self-efficacy may provide an avenue for engaging those clinical educators whose self-efficacy is low and/or those who did not receive high student evaluations. Given there is no gold standard measure of clinical teaching quality, educators should engage with multiple sources of feedback to benchmark their current performance level, and identify opportunities to improve. Student and self-evaluations using the OCTQ and evaluation of self-efficacy using the SECT, are useful tools for inclusion in a whole-of-system approach to evaluation of the clinical learning environment.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherBMC
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.titleClinical educator self-efficacy, self-evaluation and its relationship with student evaluations of clinical teaching
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12909-020-02278-z
melbourne.affiliation.departmentMedical Education
melbourne.source.titleBMC Medical Education
melbourne.source.volume20
melbourne.source.issue1
dc.rights.licenseCC BY
melbourne.elementsid1467600
melbourne.contributor.authorVaughan, Brett
dc.identifier.eissn1472-6920
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record