In experts' words: Translating theory to practice for teaching self-regulated learning.

INTRODUCTION: Health professions education (HPE) should help students to competently self-regulate their learning, preparing them for future challenges. This study explored the perspectives of expert self-regulated learning (SRL) researchers and practitioners on the practical integration of SRL theories into teaching. METHODS: An exploratory qualitative research study was conducted involving semi-structured interviews with acknowledged research leaders in the field of SRL and/or experienced professionals dedicated to teaching SRL strategies for complex skills in different disciplines. The data were analyzed using an iterative thematic approach guided by a six-step framework. RESULTS: Fifteen interviews were conducted with experts from six countries representing diverse contexts, cultures, and disciplines. We identified five themes related to translating theory to practice for teaching SRL in HPE: theoretical issues, cultural aspects, stakeholders' participation, teaching complexity, assessment, and feedback. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a useful starting point for teaching SRL. The experts suggest a supportive learning environment with the guidance of competent teachers by using general and task-specific teaching and learning strategies, as well as sufficient sources and cycles of feedback, all tailored to the culture and context. These findings call for a shift in faculty development programs to foster teachers to support second-order scaffolding in HPE.

Crossborder curriculum partnerships: medical students' experiences on critical aspects.

BACKGROUND: The past decade has witnessed an upsurge in medical curriculum partnerships established across national boundaries to offer students at the foreign institution (host) a learning experience comparable to that of students at the exporting institution (home). However, since the learning environments and national healthcare contexts differ greatly between institutions, concerns have been raised in the literature about potential low quality of curriculum delivery, inadequate preparation of students to practice in the host country healthcare setting, and a culture shock for host students having to study a home curriculum.. The experiences and opinions of medical students related to these concerns have not been investigated. This study takes an explorative approach on key challenges faced by host institution students. METHOD: Three hundred sixty-one host students recruited from 3 partnerships completed a survey about their motives, transition from high school, language, preparedness for practice, future career planning, and general satisfaction. Descriptive statistics of closed-ended items and thematic analysis of open-ended items were performed. RESULTS: Findings revealed that students generally held positive views of the education they received. Switching to a new language of instruction (English) and learning environment was not perceived as a major obstacle. However, a significant portion of students who as non-nationals did not speak the language of the patient population felt this complicated effective workplace-based learning. CONCLUSION: Despite differences in learning experiences, host students felt the partnership afforded opportunities to acquire unique academic competencies and boost their career. Further adaptation of the home curriculum to the host country healthcare system may be beneficial, without losing sight of medical curriculum partnerships' potential to offer graduates an international outlook on global healthcare.

Twelve tips for crossborder curriculum partnerships in medical education.

Crossborder curriculum partnerships are a relatively new and fast-growing form of internationalization in which the curriculum that has been developed by one institution (the home institution) crosses borders and is implemented in another institution (the host institution). These partnerships aim to provide comparable learning experiences to the students in both institutions and are driven by a variety of motives, such as strengthening international networks, increasing financial gains, and stimulating research spinoffs. Although popular, crossborder curriculum partnerships are also criticized for their potentially low educational quality, failing to address fundamental differences in teaching and learning between the home and host institutions, and not addressing the educational needs of the host country's health care system. Our aim is to provide guidance to those considering or engaged in designing, developing, managing, and reviewing a crossborder curriculum partnership or other forms of international educational partnerships in medical education. Drawing from research, personal, and institutional experiences in this area, we listed twelve tips categorized into four themes, which contribute to the establishment of sustainable partnerships that can withstand the aforementioned criticism.

Connected, attracted, and concerned: A Q study on medical crossborder curriculum partnerships.

INTRODUCTION: A new form of internationalization has been trending upward in the medical education realm: crossborder medical curriculum partnerships established to deliver the same, or adapted, curriculum to groups of geographically separated students. This study aims to investigate crossborder medical curriculum partnerships by exploring the experiences of teachers at the recipient institution who have a key role in delivering the program. METHODS: From four pioneering recipient medical schools, 24 teachers participated in a Q-sort study. Each participant rank-ordered 42 statements about teaching in a crossborder medical curriculum on a scale from -5 (indicating strong disagreement) to +5 (indicating strong agreement). The authors conducted a "by-person" factor analysis to uncover distinct patterns in the ranking of statements, using the statistical results and participants' comments about their Q sorts to interpret these patterns and translate them into distinct viewpoints. RESULTS: Three viewpoints emerged, reflecting: (1) a feeling of connectedness with the partner institution, trust in the quality of the curriculum, and appreciation of interinstitutional relationships; (2) the partnership's attractiveness because of the career opportunities it offers; and (3) concerns over the quality of graduates because of doubts about the appropriateness of the didactic model and insufficient attention to local healthcare needs, and over the practical feasibility of such partnerships. CONCLUSIONS: The three viewpoints identified revealed a pallet of views on how host teachers might experience their work. It shows the heterogeneous features of this group and seems to counterbalance reports that they are feeling "deprived" from their role as teacher. Two viewpoints featured an appreciation of interinstitutional relationships and of the partnership, especially when perceiving a degree of autonomy. Partners can capitalize on all different viewpoints by deploying procedure and policies to raise the quality of education delivery.

Exporting a Student-Centered Curriculum: A Home Institution's Perspective.

Numerous, mainly Anglo-Saxon, higher education institutions have agreements with foreign providers to deliver their curricula abroad. This trend is gradually making inroads into the medical domain, where foreign institutions undertake to offer their students learning experiences similar to those of the home institution. Not an easy feat, as the national health care contexts differ greatly between institutions. In a bid to export the curriculum, institutions risk compromising their financial resilience and reputation. This article presents an instrumental case study of a home institution's perspective on the establishment of a cross-border student-centered curriculum partnership. It provides the reader with a practical discourse on dimensions that need to be bridged between home and host contexts, and on new working processes that need to be integrated within the home institution's existing organizational structure. We describe the advantages and disadvantages based on our experiences with a centralized organizational approach, and advocate for a gradual move toward decentral interfaculty communities of practice.

An exploration of crossborder medical curriculum partnerships: Balancing curriculum equivalence and local adaptation.

CONTEXT: Worldwide, medical schools have entered into crossborder curriculum partnerships (CCPs) to provide equivalent curricula and learning experiences to groups of geographically separated students. Paradoxically, this process also involves adaptation of curricula to suit local contexts. This study has focused on challenges faced by medical Crossborder curriculum programme directors and strategies they employed to overcome these. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study on six CCPs using document analysis and semi-structured interviews with 13 programme directors from 12 medical schools. Interview transcripts were coded iteratively, followed by cross-case analysis. RESULTS: The challenges faced by CCP programme directors are four-fold, springing from differences in health care systems, legislation and political interference, teaching and learning environments, and partnership. Deliberate strategies, such as intensifying interactions between partners in all academic echelons, can help to overcome these. Partnerships vary in their setup and collaboration strategy. CONCLUSION: Medical CCPs are challenging though seem feasible. Partnerships with more solid integration of academic operations appear robust in terms of ownership and provide, besides financial, also academic advantages to both institutions. However, more research is needed on the long-term effects on quality of graduates and impact on the host health care system.