Friday, 31 May 2019

Digital Literacy, and Digital Scholarship

Digital literacy 

What are digital competencies required for successful learning in self-directed, blended and traditional learning and training settings?

Geng, S., Law, K.M.Y. & Niu, B. Investigating self-directed learning and technology readiness in blending learning environment. Int J Educ Technol High Educ (2019) 16: 17.

21st Century Competencies: Learning to Learn (2013)

Digital Scholarship

Medical Education Research

(see page 9)

Tip - anytime you are introduced to a new concept/idea - do concurrent text, image and video searches, using search engine optimisation strategies embedded in search engines (e.g. Google) to highlight most clicked, most read, most often cited/linked to/recommended digital online content.

Tip - as you do first cut review of content (both in syllabus, and which you find yourself), look for key words-concepts-illustrations, and build you learning, and new searches - deep dives around these. While always looking to "use" (by discussing, referencing, citing ... and asking questions about) these ideas - skills - impressions/opinions/viewpoints (defend-argue for-examine from multiple viewpoints). Idea is to "transfer" to practice. Apply, and be able to apply, to practice.

Cristancho SM, Goldszmidt M, Lingard L, Watling C. Qualitative research
essentials for medical education. Singapore Med J. 2018 Dec;59(12):622-627. doi: 
10.11622/smedj.2018093. Epub 2018 Jul 16. Review.

Ramani S, Mann K. Introducing medical educators to qualitative study design:
Twelve tips from inception to completion. Med Teach. 2016 May;38(5):456-63. doi: 
10.3109/0142159X.2015.1035244. Epub 2015 Apr 21.

Sullivan, G. M., & Sargeant, J. (2011). Qualities of qualitative research: part I. Journal of graduate medical education, 3(4), 449–452. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00221.1

Sargeant J. (2012). Qualitative Research Part II: Participants, Analysis, and Quality Assurance. Journal of graduate medical education, 4(1), 1–3. doi:10.4300/JGME-D-11-00307.1

Tip: Challenge yourself to apply Miler's pyramid to Medical Education Research competency training - know, knows how, shows how, and does ...... Then apply this / use this model for "self-directed learning". Google search for "millers pyramid"

... by asking yourself questions, giving yourself tasks ... search and look for what is, and how to do ..... then practice, practice, practice (which includes use, discuss, apply, get feedback ... including from running online tests on dummy and pilot data sets ... iteratively and repeatedly ... until you achieve competency, proficiency, and mastery ... then teach others how to ... "see one, do, then teach - with reflection, and feedback"

Lastly (for today), Tip: for my own learning, when encountering something new, I find the first step ... becoming familiar with key concepts, and skills ... the ability to recognise ... then describe ... the key, most important, foundational step. You then iteratively and cumulatively build up your knowledge, skills and feel (for, and tacit knowledge and impressions of a topic, theme and area) on this foundation. How "good" you become is only limited by how much time, effort, practice, and feedback (deliberate practice) you undertake. And how much you care about this. Everything begins and ends with your motivation, and purpose. And whether you have to, and want to use your "new"/"this" knowledge and skills.

One more Tip ... for your own thesis project ... find something you really, really care about (knowing answer to) ... and you will find the motivation, training, and means to find the answer(s). And complete your MHPE thesis proposal, and project.

Artino, A. R., Jr, La Rochelle, J. S., Dezee, K. J., & Gehlbach, H. (2014). Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87. Medical teacher, 36(6), 463–474. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.889814

Google search for "types of scales, and principles of scales development in medical education research"

Bolander Laksov K, Dornan T, Teunissen PW. Making theory explicit - An
analysis of how medical education research(ers) describe how they connect to
theory. BMC Med Educ. 2017 Jan 19;17(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0848-1.

Google search for "theoretical frameworks in medical education research"

"Finally one must remember that, there is no substitute to actually working hands-on with dummy or real data sets, and to seek the advice of a statistician, in order to learn the nuances of statistical hypothesis testing." quote from
Nayak, B. K., & Hazra, A. (2011). How to choose the right statistical test?. Indian journal of ophthalmology, 59(2), 85–86. doi:10.4103/0301-4738.77005

Google search for "video narrative analysis approaches"

Google search for "step by step applying t-test in medical education research"

Google search for "choosing statistical test in medical education research"

Hardavella, G., Aamli-Gaagnat, A., Saad, N., Rousalova, I., & Sreter, K. B. (2017). How to give and receive 
feedback effectively. Breathe (Sheffield, England), 13(4), 327–333. doi:10.1183/20734735.009917

Dolmans, D., Loyens, S., Marcq, H., & Gijbels, D. (2016). Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: a review of the literature. Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 21(5), 1087–1112. doi:10.1007/s10459-015-9645-6

Dean Parmelee, Larry K. Michaelsen, Sandy Cook & Patricia D. Hudes (2012) Team-based learning: A practical guide: AMEE Guide No. 65, Medical Teacher, 34:5, e275-e287, DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.651179

Google search for "impact of TBL and PBL on deep and superficial learning"

Google search for "one minute preceptor model nursing"

Google search for "rehearsal just before performance improves outcomes in application of clinical skills"

O'Leary JD, O'Sullivan O, Barach P, Shorten GD. Improving clinical performance
using rehearsal or warm-up: an advanced literature review of randomized and
observational studies. Acad Med. 2014 Oct;89(10):1416-22. doi:
10.1097/ACM.0000000000000391. Review.

Google search for "participant experience in structured debrief session after code blue event"

Google search for "interprofessional education in nursing"

Homeyer, S., Hoffmann, W., Hingst, P., Oppermann, R. F., & Dreier-Wolfgramm, A. (2018). Effects of interprofessional education for medical and nursing students: enablers, barriers and expectations for optimizing future interprofessional collaboration - a qualitative study. BMC nursing, 17, 13. doi:10.1186/s12912-018-0279-x

Google search for "applying theories of social cultural learning in interprofessional health professions education"

Google search for "using deliberate practice in training for opthalmology clinical skills best methods"

Mastery Learning and Deliberate Practice in Medical Education (Academic Medicine Article Collection, 2019)

Google search for "guided reflective writing"

Google search for "guided daily reflective journal with ongoing feedback to enhance nursing education"

Journal writing in experiential education: possibilities, problems, and recommendations (CYC-Online journal)

Google search for "medical students learning point of care ultrasound in the Emergency Department a self regulated learning perspective"

Mackay FD, Zhou F, Lewis D, Fraser J, Atkinson PR. Can You Teach Yourself
Point-of-care Ultrasound to a Level of Clinical Competency? Evaluation of a
Self-directed Simulation-based Training Program. Cureus. 2018 Sep 17;10(9):e3320.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.3320.

Wednesday, 1 May 2019

SoTL and RIME workshop @ CenMED, Wednesday, 15 May 2019

Goh P, Sandars J, 2019, 'Digital Scholarship – rethinking educational scholarship in the digital world', MedEdPublish, 8, [2], 15,

Quantity and Quality, Value and Impact. Assessment and Evaluation. Professional Practice and Administrative Review, Recognition, Reward (Systems and Processes).

above from

Rethinking the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning for a Digital Age 
Poh-Sun Goh 

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is a set of unifying ideas centred around proposals put forward in a series of scholarly articles by Boyer, Glassick, Hutchings and Shulman, and embraced by the scholarly community (Boyer 1990; Glassick 2000; Hutchings & Schulman 1999). The aim of this Short Communication is to expand upon each category of scholarship proposed by Boyer, by adding the scholarship of Creation, Curation with attribution, Transfer to practice, and Workplace/Lifelong learning; add to Glassick’s six standards the Digital standards of Openness and Visibility, and expand on Hutchings and Shulman’s three minimum requirements of scholarship by incorporating ideas from networked learning and connectivism by George Siemens (Siemens 2005). We hope that this article contributes to move forward thinking on the SoTL, for a Digital Age.

The Scholarship of Creation is well accepted in the Arts, and has analogies to the creative process when a medical educator creates educational materials. A strong argument can be made, and has been made that this is similar to the recognition that artists receive, particularly when their work is presented for public review, critique and commentary (Boyer 1990; Hutchings & Schulman 1999). The creation of digital materials for medical education and training, is hard work, often inspirited by the same creative impulse that drives artistic endeavours, particularly when imbued with an intentional, informed, reflective, scholarly approach; and is similar to the scholarship of discovery. Awareness of this should be raised in both the medical education community, and amongst our administrative peers, to recognise and reward medical education scholars during appointments, promotion and the tenure process.

Similarly, the act of artistic curation, and the professional work of curators in the Arts, has similarities to the work of medical educators, when we assemble educational and training materials. A strong argument again can be made that this has similarities to the Scholarship of Integration (Boyer 1990), and should be given academic and professional recognition and reward, similar to the Scholarship of Creation. Digital platforms and processes makes the Scholarship of Curation open, accessible and visible.

Taking this argument further, the act, or Scholarship of Transfer to Practice, has an analogy with the Scholarship of Application. Digital practice makes this again particularly open, and visible to peers, assessors and evaluators, and when a scholarly approach as proposed by Glassick (2000) is applied to this Scholarship of Practice, appropriate academic recognition can be again accorded to this effort. 

The focus of outcomes of learning and teaching guides both the Scholarship of Teaching, and our focus in Workplace and Lifelong learning. Technology enhanced learning (TEL), makes the educational and learning process, as well as performance outcomes of this process open and visible, through a digital analytics process (Goh 2017). 

As we examine the categories of scholarship proposed by Boyer, the affordances of digital teaching and learning, and draw analogies and inspiration from practices in the Arts; an argument can be made that awareness, and recognition of the efforts of medical educators in Creation, Curation, Transfer to Practice and Workplace and Lifelong learning can and should given.


Boyer EL. 1990. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Glassick CE. 2000. Boyer's expanded definitions of scholarship, the standards for assessing scholarship, and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Acad
Med. Sep;75(9):877-80.

Goh PS. 2017. Learning analytics in medical education. MedEdPublish 6. 

Siemens G. 2005. Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age.International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3-10.

Hutchings P, Shulman LS. 1999. The Scholarship of Teaching: New Elaborations, New Developments, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 31:5, 10-15, DOI: 10.1080/00091389909604218

Three takeaways:

1) The scholarship categories proposed by Boyer (Discovery, Integration, Application and Teaching) can be each expanded to include Creation (Digital content and online repositories), Curation with attribution, Transfer to practice and Work place/Life long learning. 

2) That we add to Glassick's six standards (Clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation and reflective critique) with Digital standards of openness (with focus on making the learning process, and data to inform - demonstrate outcomes of learning visible and accessible openly online).

3) That we expand on Schulman's three minimum requirements of scholarship (public, in form suitable for critical review and evaluation, accessible for exchange with, and to be build upon by other members of the scholarly community) for the digital age, incorporating the ideas from George Siemens (connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age) combined with classical educational pedagogy of relevant, contextual, collaborative, active learning with feedback.

Goh PS., Sandars J (2019). Increasing tensions in the ubiquitous use of technology for medical education. Med Teach. Accepted for publication, 22 October 2018, published online 16 January 2019.
DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2018.1540773