RESUMEN
Social media have become a major part of an interconnected society, impacting personal and professional lives. This Point/Counterpoint presents two opposing viewpoints on the question of whether social media should be used in dental education as a learning and communication tool for dental students. Viewpoint 1 argues that social media benefit student learning and should be used as a tool in dental education. This argument is based on evidence concerning use of social media and improved learning across health professions, improved peer-peer communication in clinical education, improved engagement in interprofessional education (IPE), and provision of a mechanism for safe and improved communication between practitioners and patients, as well as faculty and students. Viewpoint 2 argues that potential problems and risks in using social media outweigh any benefits found in learning and therefore social media should not be used as a tool in dental education. This viewpoint is supported by evidence of negative effects on learning, the establishment of a negative digital footprint in the public's view, risk of privacy violations when using social media, and the new phenomenon of Internet addiction with its negative physiological effects on social media users.
Asunto(s)
Medios de Comunicación Sociales , Estudiantes de Odontología/estadística & datos numéricos , Comunicación , Educación en Odontología/métodos , Humanos , Aprendizaje , Profesionalismo , Medios de Comunicación Sociales/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudiantes de Odontología/psicologíaRESUMEN
Multisource assessment (MSA) uses multiple assessors to provide feedback. Little is known about the validity of using MSA feedback for improving students' ability to self-assess in a preclinical environment. Therefore, the aim of this study was to measure the validity of using a defined reflective process involving an MSA tool for building skill in dental students' self-evaluation of caries excavation on extracted teeth. As part of this process, 104 first-year students at one U.S. dental school used a self-generated study plan (SGSP) for structured reflection on MSA feedback during the 2013-14 academic year. Interrater agreement, determined through calculation of percentage-agreements in scoring, was measured among three assessor groups (self-, peer, and expert assessors) in formative assessment and between two assessor groups (self- and expert assessors) in summative assessment two weeks apart, allowing for reflective practice and completion of an SGSP between assessments. Validity for improving self-assessment was determined by measuring significance in positive shifts of agreement between self- and expert assessors. The results showed that interrater agreement between the self- and expert assessors increased significantly: from a 28% agreement in formative assessment to a 60% agreement in summative assessment. Significance in percentage shifts between assessments was demonstrated with a McNemar score of 0.26 (p<0.001). These results suggest that the described MSA tool and reflective process in an SGSP may be valid methods for improving skill in student self-evaluation of competence in caries excavation on extracted teeth.
Asunto(s)
Competencia Clínica/normas , Caries Dental/cirugía , Educación en Odontología/normas , Evaluación Educacional/normas , Estudiantes de Odontología , Preparación de la Cavidad Dental/normas , Humanos , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Autoevaluación (Psicología)RESUMEN
This pilot study compared second- and fourth-year dental students' perceived values of newly implemented clinical leadership experiences (CLEs) at one U.S. dental school during the 2012-13 academic year. In the CLEs, fourth-year (D4) students mentored second-year (D2) dental students during faculty-supervised patient treatment. The two cohorts' perceived value of the experiences was measured with questionnaires consisting of five-point Likert scale questions and open text responses. Out of a total of 114 D2 and 109 D4 students, 46 D2 students and 35 D4 students participated (response rates of 40.4% and 32.1%, respectively). While responses from both cohorts showed they highly valued the CLEs, the D2s perceived greater value: 4.07 (0.53) v. 3.51 (0.95), p<0.003. Both cohorts reported feeling that D4s were prepared to mentor D2s, that the CLEs had educational benefits, and that the CLEs increased their comfort with peer communication. Theme analysis of open text questions revealed that the respondents perceived the D4s were more accessible than faculty and provided guidance and individual attention; the CLEs increased student comfort; the CLEs reinforced D4 skills, knowledge, and confidence; and the CLEs provided management, leadership, and collaborative work experience. Theme analysis also highlighted student concerns about a lack of program structure. Overall, the majority of both groups valued CLEs in their dental education. Particular advantages they perceived were increased comfort, guidance, and attention. Further program development should address student concerns. These results suggest that similar programs should be considered and/or expanded in other dental schools' curricula.