ALD 701 First Session

We had a busy morning and talked about ideas (my favorite things to discuss)

We talked about Constructivist Learning Theory and Social Cognitive Theory.  We talked about philosophies and beliefs about learning and teaching.  We talked briefly about Learning Styles and the impact of Learning Styles on instruction.  We did not address your chapter reading on Behavioral Learning Theory, so I hope at least one of you addresses the contribution Behaviorism has had on teaching and learning in the US. (although out of favor, it is still very much alive). 

I look forward to reading your posts...  Be sure to respond to one of your colleagues ideas

Teaching "Persona"

At our Education Group meeting this week the topic of "Teaching Persona" came up as a topic for discussion. Teaching persona was defined by one source as "beyond technique or curriculum.. the teacher's own way of being with students"*. Another source suggested that a teacher's persona was "an image that the teacher presents to the class**" that could be actively chosen. Of all that I read, it seemed that authenticity was considered important. However, one school of thought was that one could be authentic and still provide different "images" to different groups or contexts. The most common example was the differing contexts of giving a grand rounds versus teaching on the inpatient service. In this example, the attending could exhibit a formal "expert" persona during grand rounds and a more relaxed informal teaching persona during teaching rounds. Our group was split on this topic with some feeling that persona changes could lead to confusion and uncertainty on the part of learners who may withold sharing their "true self" because they don't feel they have a handle on the "true self" of the teacher. Others shared their own experience of "getting up" for a teaching encounter minimizing their own more introverted side and maximizing their ability to engage and interact with their students. Do you have any thoughts on this topic?

Together or Apart, Is There a Better Way to Teach?

I subsribe to the DR-ED Listserve out of Michigan State University. This is a really good listserve of mainly medical educators, although others chime in every once in awhile to liven things up a bit. Over the past two weeks there has been a lively thread concerning the best way to teach. The choices given were 1) interactive facilitation or independant reading with lectures. Each side provided literature to back up their beliefs. The usual arguements were posed. "You may learn more stuff by attending a lecture, but the depth of understanding will be superficial" and "Knowing facts (stuff) is important, you can't problem solve without knowing the underlying facts." I think maybe I've been in this education business too long, as I have seen these arguements surface time and again. Since I have access to this BLOG, I'm going to share my thinking on this.



From all my years of study and practice, I have distilled all of the equivical literature about how best to teach down to three commandments>

1. Thou shalt engage the learner - If students (at any level) are not engaged, they will not learn. What engages learners depends on the content, the learner and the context. Learners can be fully engaged by interacting with an interesting essay, a well designed textbook, a computer learning module, short excellent lectures and small group activities.
2. When teaching about complex concepts, thou shalt offer opportunities for learners to "elaborate" on new concepts - When topics are complex or controversial learners usually benefit from hearing others point of view and having the opportunity to articulate their understanding and receive feedback from experts and peers. Although the norm is face-to-face during discussion groups, on-line electronic discussions work well for certain content and learners. The disadvantage of "solitary study" is that the learner is stuck with only 2 perspectives (the teacher and him or herself)
3. Thou shalt design and share goals for any instructional activity - Purposeless chats about anything that crosses our minds may be therapeutically beneficial, but are not a good basis for learning. Carefully crafted cases can provide the goal as can experienced facilitators.

Perhaps overly simplistic, but I've found these three commandments to be very serviceable.

Simulation in Medical Education

We had an interesting talk about the use of simulation in medical education this morning and it made me think about how far we have come from the "apprenticeship model' of the late 19th and early 20th century. The concept of practicing medical procedures on inanimate objects rather than on patients (especially me) seems a "no brainer", yet medicine has been slow to take full advantage of simulations. Perhaps the allure of the "cadaver lab" was lost on previous generations of medical students and residents, even though these labs provided the only opportunity to "do no harm" while developing skills. Today's high-tech simulation labs provide the opportunity for students and residents to practice everything from interviewing skills with standardized patients to intubation and team ACLS with high-tech mannequins.

We are designing a multi-purpose, multi-site simulation system here at the Clinic that appears to take full advantage of modern technology, all the while honoring the tradition of low-tech human-human interaction. I was impressed with the fore-thought and planning that went into the design. ...My generation marvels at robotic surgery, social media and high tech simulators, imagine the simulations that could be conceived by future generations who interact with avatars in pre-school. Will it be better medicine?? I don't know.