Loading…

Learning Style Analysis in Emergency Medicine Residency Training

OBJECTIVE: EM training and practice requires the assimilation of a great deal of knowledge and experience. Learners often have a preference for the way they receive and process new data-their preferred learning style (LS). Knowledge of the LS of faculty and residents in an EM training program can be...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Academic emergency medicine 2003-05, Vol.10 (5), p.490-490
Main Author: Barlas, D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:OBJECTIVE: EM training and practice requires the assimilation of a great deal of knowledge and experience. Learners often have a preference for the way they receive and process new data-their preferred learning style (LS). Knowledge of the LS of faculty and residents in an EM training program can be helpful to 1) guide residents to learning modalities based on their individual LS, 2) match them with faculty having complementary LS, and 3) guide program directors in designing a curriculum based on the residents' preferred LS. LS analysis has been performed in many fields, but not EM. We sought to determine the LS of EM residents and compare it with that of the faculty and with residents in other fields. METHODS: In this prospective, observational study, residents and faculty of an established 3-yr university-affiliated EM residency program completed the validated Kolb LS inventory. Comparisons between the main groups and between subgroups based on demographic and prior educational experience were made using Fisher's Exact test with a significance level of p < 0.05. RESULTS: 22 residents and 24 faculty completed surveys. Half of the residents were "assimilators," 29% were "accommodators," 17% were "divergers," and 4% were "convergers." Of the faculty half were "convergers," 18% "divergers," 18% "assimilators," and 14% "accommodators." This difference was highly significant (p < 0.002). There was no difference in the residents' LS distribution by PGY or sex. There was no difference in faculty's LS distribution by years in practice, but there was a difference by sex: 5/7 female faculty (71%) were "accommodators," whereas 11/17 male faculty (65%) were "assimilators" (p = 0.02). The resident LS resembles that of pediatricians and family physicians. The faculty LS is more like that of surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: The LS of EM residents in our program differs from that of the faculty. Improved understanding of individual and group LS can be used to enhance postgraduate education in EM.
ISSN:1069-6563
1553-2712
DOI:10.1197/aemj.10.5.490