4.5 Article

Student engagement in health professions education: AMEE Guide No. 152

期刊

MEDICAL TEACHER
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2137018

关键词

Collaborative; peer-to-peer; student engagement; students as partners

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This guide aims to provide comprehensive understanding of student engagement in health professions education. It reviews the theoretical basis explaining student engagement from three perspectives and proposes a comprehensive framework applicable to health professions education. The framework introduces the concept of "engagement through partnerships" and emphasizes the importance of considering students as partners in education. The guide also provides practical applications on how to improve student engagement and identifies current gaps in research.
This guide aims to support our colleagues to have comprehensive understanding of student engagement in health professions education. Despite the universal agreement about the significance of student engagement, there is lack of uniformity in conceptualizing and operationalizing this emerging construct. We review the theoretical basis explaining student engagement from three main perspectives: behavioral, psychological, and socio-cultural. In addition, we propose a contemporary and comprehensive framework for the student engagement in higher education, which is applicable to health professions education contexts. Drawing from this framework, we explain the conceptualization of the construct and its preceding factors, mediators, dimensions, spheres, and outcomes of student engagement. The proposed framework introduces student 'engagement through partnerships' as a novel component compared with the existing models of student engagement in higher education. This way, we are proposing a mixed model that not only considers the student as a 'customer' but also as a 'partner' in education. Engagement of students through partnerships include four areas: (1) provision of the education program, (2) scholarly research, (3) governance and quality assurance, and (4) community activities. This guide will provide practical applications on how to improve student engagement in health professions education. Finally, we highlight the current gaps in areas of research in the student engagement literature and suggested plans for future directions. Practice points Student engagement is student investment of time and energy in academic and non-academic experiences that include learning, teaching, research, governance, and community activities. Students are involved in these aspects at the cognitive, affective, behavioral, agentic, and socio-cultural dimensions. Student engagement could be explained by three theoretical perspectives: behavioral, psychological, and socio-cultural. The theoretical framework for student engagement in health professions education consists of five components: (1) antecedents of engagement, which refer to institutional and student factors as well as the interactions (student-student and student-staff), (2) mediators of engagement, which include self-efficacy, motivation, belonging, and reflectivity, (3) engagement dimensions, which refer to the five dimensions of engagement: cognitive, behavioral, emotional, agentic, and socio-cultural, (4) Spheres of engagement, which refer to engagement in own learning and engagement through partnerships, and (5) outcomes of engagement, which are short-term and long-term. Engagement through partnerships includes four main areas: (1) provision of the education program, (2) scholarly research, (3) governance and quality assurance, and (4) community activities. The following measures are necessary to promote student engagement in HPE: (1) promote a culture of community and psychological safety, (2) create a culture of 'students as partners', (3) promote the use of active, collaborative learning methods with relevance to future career, and (4) promote the use of technology-enhanced learning.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据