Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Foundational Elements of School-Specific Augmented Medical Education

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent efforts to enrich the medical education experience recommended interinstitutional and collaborative efforts. Within this context, the author describes a model for school-specific augmented medical education. The evidence-backed conceptual model is composed of six foundational elements, which include the following: technology-enriched learning environments, analytics to drive instructional interventions, cognitive neuroscience and educational psychology research (the Science of Learning), self-regulated learning strategies, competency-based approaches, and blended learning instructional design. Harnessing the creativity of our leadership, medical educators, and learners is fundamental to improving the learning experience for all. This model could be used to meaningfully guide implementation processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Garrison D, Vaughan N. Blended learning in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Garrison D, Vaughan N. Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: two case studies. Inter High Edu. 2013;18:24–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Green DP. A Gap Analysis of Course Directors’ Effective Implementation of Technology-enriched Course Designs: An Innovation Study [dissertation]. Los Angeles, Ca: University of Southern California. 2018. Retrieved from the University of Southern California Digital Library: http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll40/id/462270. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  4. VanDerLinden K. Blended learning as transformational institutional learning. New Dir High Edu. 2014;165:75–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Le TT, Prober CG. A proposal for a shared medical school curricular ecosystem. Acad Med. 2018;93:1125–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Song HS, Kalet AL, Plass JL. Assessing medical students’ self-regulation as aptitude in computer-based learning. Adv Health Sci Edu. 2011;16(1):97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen HC, van den Broek WS, ten Cate O. The case for use of entrustable professional activities in undergraduate medical education. Acad Med. 2015;90(4):431–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mehta NB, Hull AL, Young JB, Stoller JK. Just imagine: new paradigms for medical education. Acad Med. 2013;88(10):1418–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a36a07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Miller BM, Moore DE Jr, Stead WW, Balser JR. Beyond Flexner: a new model for continuous learning in the health professions. Acad Med. 2010;85(2):266–72. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181c859fb.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Prober CG, Khan S. Medical education reimagined: a call to action. Acad Med. 2013;88(10):1407–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a368bd.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Touchie C, Cate O. The promise, perils, problems and progress of competency-based medical education. Med Edu. 2016;50(1):93–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Clark RE, Estes F. Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. In: Inc; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hurtubise L, Hall E, Sheridan L, Han H. The flipped classroom in medical education: engaging students to build competency. J Med Edu Curr Dev. 2015;2:35–43. https://doi.org/10.4137/JMECD.S23895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Prober CG, Heath C. Lecture halls without lectures--a proposal for medical education. NEJM. 2012;366(18):1657–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1202451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Aronson ID, Plass JL, Bania T. Optimizing educational video through comparative trials in clinical environments. Edu Tech Res Dev. 2012;60(3):469–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-011-9231-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S, Dupras DM, Erwin PJ, Montori VM. Instructional design variations in internet-based learning for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2010;85(5):909–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d6c319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Grunwald T, Corsbie-Massay C. Guidelines for cognitively efficient multimedia learning tools: educational strategies, cognitive load, and interface design. Acad Med. 2006;81(3):213–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200603000-00003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee JE, Recker M. What do studies of learning analytics reveal about learning and instruction? A systematic literature review. Learn, des, and tech: intl comp theory, res, prac, and pol. 2018;2018:1–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17727-4_116-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Chan T, Sebok-Syer S, Thoma B, Wise A, Sherbino J, Pusic M. Learning analytics in medical education assessment: the past, the present, and the future. AEM Edu and Train. 2018;2(2):178–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Cirigliano MM, Guthrie C, Pusic MV, Cianciolo AT, Lim-Dunham JE, Spickard A III, et al. Yes, and … exploring the future of learning analytics in medical education. Teach and Learn in Med. 2017;29(4):368–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2017.1384731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kredell M. “CHARIOT begins testing wearable technology”. 2018. Summer. Retrieved October 7, 2018, from: https://www.rossier.usc.edu/magazine/ss2018/chariot-begins-testing-wearable-technology/. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  22. Immordino-Yang MH, Christodoulou JA, Singh V. Rest is not idleness: Implications of the brain's default mode for human development and education Perspec on. Psy Sci: Assoc for Psy Sci. 2012;7(4):352–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612447308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Taub M, Azevedo R, Bouchet F, Khosravifar B. Can the use of cognitive and metacognitive self-regulated learning strategies be predicted by learners’ levels of prior knowledge in hypermedia-learning environments. Comp Edu. 2014;39(October):356–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Anguera JA, Boccanfuso J, Rintoul JL, Al-Hashimi O, Faraji F, Janowich J, et al. Video game multitasking training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature. 2013;501(September):97–101. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Berman NB, Fall LH, Maloney CG, Levine DA. Computer-assisted instruction in clinical education: a roadmap to increasing CAI implementation. Adv in Health Sci Edu. 2008;13(3):373–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-006-9041-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mayer RE. Applying the science of learning to medical education. Med Edu. 2010;44(6):543–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03624.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mayer RE. Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dembo MH, Seli H. Academic self-regulation. In: Dembo MH, Seli H, editors. Motivation and learning strategies for college success: a focus on self-regulated learning. 5th ed. New York, N.Y: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group, Inc; 2016. p. 3–27.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Zimmerman BJ. Academic studying and the development of personal skill: a self-regulatory perspective. Edu Psy. 1998;33(2):73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Pettepher CC, Lomis KD, Osheroff N. From theory to practice: utilizing competency-based milestones to assess professional growth and development in the foundational science blocks of a pre-clerkship medical school curriculum. Med Sci Edu. 2016;26(3):491–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-016-0262-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Englander R, Cameron T, Ballard AJ, Dodge J, Bull J, Aschenbrener CA. Toward a common taxonomy of competency-based domains for the health professions and competencies for physicians. Acad Med. 2013;88(8):1088–94. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31829a3b2b.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hawkins RE, Welcher CM, Holmboe ES, Kirk LM, Norcini JJ, Simons KB, et al. Implementation of competency-based medical education: are we addressing the concerns and challenges? Med Edu. 2015;49(11):1086–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Levine MF, Shorten G. Competency-based medical education: its time has arrived. Can J Anes. 2016;63(7):802–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-016-0638-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Green DP. Next generation medical education: facilitating student-centered learning environments. EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative Brief. 2016; 1–6. Retrieved from: https://library.educause.edu/resources/2016/3/next-generation-medical-education. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  35. Morton CE, Saleh SN, Smith SF, Hemani A, Ameen A, Bennie TD, et al. Blended learning: how can we optimise undergraduate student engagement? BMC Med Edu. 2016;16(1):195–202. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0716-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. O’Connor EE, Fried J, McNulty N, Shah P, Hogg JP, Lewis P, et al. Flipping radiology education right side up. Acad Rad. 2016;23(7):810–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2016.02.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wood ML, Forgie SE. A first step to blended delivery: introducing an online component to an infectious diseases course using a photography-based social media platform. Med Sci Edu. 2015;25(2):101–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-015-0103-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kalet AL, Song HS, Sarpel U, Schwartz R, Brenner J, Ark TK, et al. Just enough, but not too much interactivity leads to better clinical skills performance after a computer assisted learning module. Med Tea. 2012;34(10):833–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.706727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Song SH, Pusic M, Nick MW, Sarpel U, Plass JL, Kalet AL. The cognitive impact of interactive design features for learning complex materials in medical education. Comp Edu. 2014;71(February):198–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Immordino-Yang MH, Singh V. Perspectives from social and affective neuroscience on the design of digital learning technologies. In: Immordino-Yang MH, editor. Emotions, learning, and the brain: Exploring the educational implications of affective neuroscience. New York, N.Y: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc; 2016. p. 181–90.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Eccles J. Expectancy value motivational theory. In: Anderman EM, Anderman LH, editors. Psychology of Classroom Learning, vol. 1. Macmillan Reference USA: Detroit; 2006. p. 390–3. Retrieved from: http://go.galegroup.com.libproxy1.usc.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3027800112&sid=summon&v=2.1&u=usocal_main&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=6ab39823387b6b715067288033f65e7c. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  42. Pintrich PR. A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. J Edu Psy. 2003;95(4):667–86. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Elmore RF. Bridging the gap between standards and achievement. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute. 2002. Retrieved July 12, 2003, from http://www.shankerinstitute.org/resource/bridging-gap-between-standards-and-achievement. Accessed 30 May 2018.

  44. Hentschke GC, Wohlstetter P. Cracking the code of accountability. Univ S Calif Urban Educ. 2004;2004(Spring/Summer):17–9.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Graham CR, Woodfield W, Harrison JB. A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. Inter High Edu. 2013;18:4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Porter WW, Graham CR, Bodily RG, Sandberg DS. A qualitative analysis of institutional drivers and barriers to blended learning adoption in higher education. Inter High Edu. 2016;28:17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author wishes to thank Melora Sundt, Kenneth Yates, Monique Datta, and Kathy Hanson. Additionally, conversations with Charles Prober aided with streamlining and improving this manuscript. Importantly, the author wishes to thank the Educational Development Office’s Division of Innovations in Medical Education at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine for support and assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Innovations in Medical Education for the Educational Development Office, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Rosenstiel Med Science Bldg, 1600 NW 10th Ave, Room 2019C, Locator Code R160, Miami, FL, USA

    David P. Green

Authors
  1. David P. Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David P. Green.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Previous Presentations

Portions of this work originated as part of the author’s dissertation study at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Green, D.P. Foundational Elements of School-Specific Augmented Medical Education. Med.Sci.Educ. 29, 561–569 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00702-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00702-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation