Near peer-assisted learning to improve confidence for medical students' situational judgment tests.

BACKGROUND: The situational judgment test (SJT) was introduced for all graduating United Kingdom medical students in 2013. Students have anxiety over time pressures and heavy weighting of a single examination. AIMS: This study aimed to examine formal SJT preparation available, perceptions of a near peer-delivered course, and to measure improvement in students' confidence. INNOVATION: Foundation doctors ( first 2 years of postgraduate training) produced a "Situational Judgment Test Preparation Course" in November 2015. METHODS: Feedback was collected via Likert scores rating teaching, a mock examination, and pre- and post-course confidence along with free-text responses. Delayed feedback was collected via an online survey. RESULTS: Forty-four students completed the feedback. Seventy percent reported <2 h of university SJT preparation. There were significant post-course improvements in familiarity with structure, scoring system, knowledge and content, and overall SJT confidence (P < 0.05). Delayed feedback showed sustained improvement in familiarity with knowledge and content (P < 0.05). Qualitative analysis revealed themes of improved confidence, approachable tutors, and identifying question strategies. DISCUSSION: Students perceived a lack of formal SJT preparation which was reflected in low pre-course confidence. Improvements in confidence may reflect a unique insight into how to approach the examination from those having recently undertaken it.

Which peer teaching methods do medical students prefer?

BACKGROUND: The beneficial effects of peer teaching in medical education have been well-described in the literature. However, it is unclear whether students prefer to be taught by peers in small or large group settings. This study's aim was to identify differences in medical students' preferences and perceptions of small-group versus large-group peer teaching. METHODS: Questionnaires were administered to medical students in Year 3 and Year 4 (first 2 years of clinical training) at one institution in the United Kingdom to identify their experiences and perceptions of small-and large-group peer teaching. For this study, small-group peer teaching was defined as a tutorial, or similar, taught by peer tutor to a group of 5 students or less. Large-group peer teaching was defined as a lecture, or similar, taught by peer tutors to a group of more than 20 students. RESULTS: Seventy-three students (81% response rate) completed the questionnaires (54% males; median age of 23). Nearly 55% of respondents reported prior exposure to small-group peer teaching but a larger proportion of respondents (86%) had previously attended large-group peer teaching. Of all valid responses, 49% did not have a preference of peer teaching method while 47% preferred small-group peer teaching. The majority of Year 3 students preferred small-group peer teaching to no preference (62.5% vs 37.5%, Fisher's exact test; P = 0.035) whereas most Year 4 students did not report a particular preference. Likert-scale responses showed that the majority of students held negative perceptions about large-group peer teaching, in comparison with small-group peer teaching, with respect to (1) interactivity, (2) a comfortable environment to ask questions, and (3) feedback received. DISCUSSION: Most respondents in this study did not report a preference for small-versus large-group settings when taught by peers. More Year 3 respondents were likely to prefer small-group peer teaching as opposed to Year 4 respondents.