고성취 의과대학생들의 학업성취를 결정하는 요인은?: 질적 연구(Med Teach, 2014)

고성취 의과대학생들의 학업성취를 결정하는 요인은?: 질적 연구(Med Teach, 2014)

What factors determine academic achievement in high achieving undergraduate medical students? A qualitative study

Hamza M. Abdulghani, Abdulmajeed A. Al-Drees, Mahmood S. Khalil, Farah Ahmad, Gominda G. Ponnamperuma & Zubair Amin

SRL메커니즘은 동기부여적 신념 또는 학습 전략, 계획된 학습활동에 대한 참여 등의 요인에 의해 촉진되며, 시험에서 학생의 수행능력에 중요하게 기여하는 요인이다.

Mechanism of self-regulated learning (SRL), facilitated by factors such as motivational beliefs and learning strategies, as well as participation in scheduled learning activities, are important contributors to student performance at examin- ations (Stegers-Jager et al. 2012).

연구 맥락

Study context

첫 2년은 전임상 과목 교육

The first two years of the curriculum are devoted to preclinical studies, 

임상실습은 남은 3년간 진행됨

The clinical clerkship takes place during remaining three years. 

Materials and methods

연구 설계

The study design

 

Grounded theory는 가설-driven 질적 혹은 semi-quantitative 방법론과 달리, 참여자의 반응에 대한 특정한 패턴에 대해 아무런 가정을 하지 않으며, 참여자는 자유롭게 말할 수 있고, 반응을 해석하는 것은 자료해석 과정에서 이뤄진다. 이러한 맥락에서 개별 인터뷰보다 FGD가 더 선호되는데, 왜냐하면 개별 인터뷰는 참여자들이 진실되고 제약받지 않는 답을 할 가능성이 보다 낮기 때문이다. 또한 의학교육 맥락에서 FGD는 학생의 목소리를 더 장려하고encourage, 잠재 교육과정을 드러나게 해준다.

Grounded theory, unlike hypothesis driven quantitative or semi-quantitative methods,does not presuppose any particular pattern of response from the participants. Participants are encouraged to speak-up freely; interpretation of response patterns is formed during the data analysis. Individual interviews were deemed to be less preferable than FGD in this context as during the individual interview the participants might be less forthcoming in providing truthful and unrestricted answers (Fontana & Frey,2005). Moreover, particularly in the context of medical education, FGD can be used to encourage students’ voices(Lam et al. 2001) and to reveal the hidden curriculum(Barbour 2005). 

2, 3, 4, 5학년 학생중 학업성적에 따라 초청함. 

Volunteer participants from the second, third, fourth and fifth years, based on their academic records, were invited for the study.

FGD의 수행

Conduct of FGD

"여러 평가를 거치며 높은 점수를 받는데 어떤 유형의 학습전략이 도움이 되었다고 생각합니까?"

‘‘What type of learning strategies in your opinion have contributed to high scores in your different course assessments?’

자료수집과 분석

Data collection and analysis

The audio-tapes were transcribed verbatim by the first author prior to data analysis. All personal and identifiable information was removed to maintain confidentiality. Then, the researchers familiarized themselves with the data to acquire contextual sensitivity by immersing in the setting of the research. As the next steps within the framework of qualitative analysis, there searchers identified a thematic framework, coded(e.g. indexed, charted, mapped), and interpreted the data(Alhaqwi et al. 2010). 

Key general statements were highlighted and were categorized into themes. The audiotapes and transcriptions further independently analyzed by the second author (A.A.).Another two researchers (K.M.S., A.F.) discussed the summa-ries and modified them until a consensus was reached. The findings of the analyses were then presented to the two groups of participants independently for validation. The participants were asked to modify or suggest changes to the interpretation of data. The participants had few suggestions and indicated that the summaries accurately reflected the FGDs points. 

결과

Results

 

 

네 가지 주요 주제가 드러났다.

Four main themes were derived from the qualitative data analysis:

(1) 학습전략 learning strategies,

(2) 자원 관리 resource management,

(3) 동기부여 motivation, and

(4) 비-학업적 문제 해결dealing with non-academic problems.

 

These themes were further sub-divided into 17 sub-themes according to the results of the discussion (Table 1). 

Theme 1: Learning strategies

(a) 수업 출석과 주요 주제에 대한 조기 수정 Lecture attendance and early revision of topics

(b) 학습 요구 우선순위 설정 Prioritization of learning needs

(c) 소그룹으로 학습하기 Learning in small groups

(d) 심화 학습 Deep learning

(e) 마인드맵 그리기 Mind mapping

(f)  다른 자료와 가이드 활용 Other sources and guidance

(g) 실습실에서의 학습 Learning in skills lab

(h) 환자로부터 배우기 Learning from patients

(i) 실수로부터 배우기 Learning from mistakes

 

시험에서 우수한 성과를 거두는 학생들은 다양한 학습상황으로부터 학습을 한다는 것을 알 수 있다. 심화학습에서 보여주는 바와 같이 실수로부터 배우는 것은 본질적으로 성찰적 학습이며, 마인드맵을 그리는 것은 학습한 내용을 효과적으로 통합하는 것이다. 이러한 접근법으로 학생들은 손쉽게 학습의 우선순위를 정할 수 있으며, 기본적 개념을 철저히 익힐 수 있다.

Based on the above results it could be argued that the students who do well at exams learn from a variety of learning situations such as from lectures, small group learning sessions, skills lab sessions, peers and patients. Their main approach to learning in the above situations is deep learning as exemplified by: learning from mistakes, which essentially highlights reflective learning; and mind mapping which highlights the effective synthesis of learning. With such an approach, the students could easily prioritise their learning to learn the basic concepts thoroughly, rather than resorting to ineffective strategies such as memorization.

Theme 2: Resource management

(a) 시간 관리 Time management

(b) 가족의 지원 Family support

이 두 요소는 서로 상호보완적이다. 학생이 시간을 소모해야 하는 일을 가족이 도와줄 때, 학생은 학습 시간을 확보할 수 있다. 다라서 가족의 지원이 효과적인 시간 관리에 기여한다.

These two factors are complementary to each other. When a family could help in time-consuming activities of the student, it frees up time for the student to study. Hence, family support could contribute towards effective time management.

Theme 3: Motivation

(a) 내적 동기부여 Internal motivation

(b) 시험 결과 Exam results

 

시험결과가 외적동기부여 요인으로 해석될 수 있으므로, 위의 두 하위주제는 내적 동기와 외적 동기로 구분할 수 있다.

Since exam results could be interpreted as a source of external motivation (i.e. reward), the above two sub-themes represent the two main categories of motivation; i.e. internal and external motivation.

Theme 4: Dealing with non-academic problems

(a) 수면 박탈 Sleep deprivation

(b) 언어 장벽 Language barrier

(c) 향수병과 스트레스 Homesickness and stress

위의 세 가지 요인 모두 '학생의 준비 부족'을 보여주는 것이다. 영어가 부족한 것은 학생이 학습의 매개체가 되는 것에 충분한 신경을 쓰지 못한 것이며, 수면 박탈은 과도학 학습량에 (미리 준비하지 않아) 시험이 가까워질수록 부담을 갖게 되는 것이고,  향수병과 스트레스는 학생이 정신적으로 의학을 공부하기에 충분히 준비되지 않은 것이다.

All the above three factors seem to indicate the ‘lack of student preparedness’. Poor English knowledge implies that the students may not have paid prior, adequate attention to master the medium of study; sleep deprivation implies bur- dening oneself closer to the examination with a lot of work, rather than preparing for the examination early, and homesickness and stress indicate that the students have not mentally prepared themselves sufficiently to study medicine.

따라서 위의 모델에서 제시된 바와 같이, 학업적 성공을 위한 모델은 세 개의 단계적 발달이 필요하다.

Hence, as suggested by the above results, a model for academic success that has three sequential steps could be developed:

• 1. 과목/시험 전에 스스로 대비해두기 Preparing oneself before the course/exam;
• 2. 과목 전과 과목 진행중에 스스로 동기부여 하기 Motivating oneself both before and during the course;
• 3. 학습전략과 자원을 적절히 활용하기 Using learning strategies and resources appropriately.

Discussion

의학교육자들의 과제는 의과대학과 그 이후에 학생을 성공으로 이끄는 요인을 찾는 것이다.

A challenge for medical educators is to identify factors that lead to student success in medical school and beyond (Ericsson 2008).

효과적인 시간관리 기술은 지속적인 학업 성공을 위해 필수적이다.

Effective time management skills are essential for continued academic success (West & Sadoski 2011).

 

---

Med Teach. 2014 Apr;36 Suppl 1:S43-8. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.886011.

What factors determine academic achievement in high achieving undergraduate medical students? A qualitativestudy.

Abdulghani HM1, Al-Drees AA, Khalil MS, Ahmad F, Ponnamperuma GG, Amin Z.

Author information

• 1King Saud University , Saudi Arabia .

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Medical students' academic achievement is affected by many factors such as motivational beliefs and emotions. Although studentswith high intellectual capacity are selected to study medicine, their academic performance varies widely.

OBJECTIVES:

The aim of this study is to explore the high achieving students' perceptions of factors contributing to academic achievement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Focus group discussions (FGD) were carried out with 10 male and 9 female high achieving (scores more than 85% in all tests) students, from the second, third, fourth and fifth academic years. During the FGDs, the students were encouraged to reflect on their learning strategies and activities. The discussion was audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed qualitatively.

RESULTS:

Factors influencing high academic achievement include: attendance to lectures, early revision, prioritization of learning needs, deep learning, learning in small groups, mind mapping, learning in skills lab, learning with patients, learning from mistakes, time management, and family support. Internal motivation and expected examination results are important drivers of high academic performance. Management of non-academicissues like sleep deprivation, homesickness, language barriers, and stress is also important for academic success.

CONCLUSION:

Addressing these factors, which might be unique for a given student community, in a systematic manner would be helpful to improvestudents' performance.

PMID:

 

24617784

 

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]