Table 3 Congruity between faculty and residents on "DONE POORLY" teaching and feedback objectives
From: Perioperative Teaching and Feedback: How are we doing in Canadian OTL-HNS programs?
AGREE AND DONE POORLY | RESIDENT mean ± SD | FACULTY mean ± SD | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|---|
TEACHING | |||
Review the anatomy | 2.3 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 0.4, 1.1* |
Express expectations of residents | 2.6 ± 1.1 | 3.4 ± 1.2 | 0.5, 1.3* |
Takes over case if inadequate pace | 3.5 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 1.0 | −0.5, 0.2 |
Asks which specific skills want to practice | 2.4 ± 0.9 | 2.9 ± 1.2 | 0.2, 0.9* |
Allows external pressures (ex: time, nursing) to influence teaching | 3.4 ± 1.1 | 3.2 ± 1.1 | −0.5, 0.2 |
FEEDBACK | |||
Provide examples of weaknesses | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | −0.2, 0.5 |
On operative decision making | 2.8 ± 1.0 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 0.2, 0.9* |
Residents ask for feedback on surgical skills | 2.8 ± 1.0 | 2.3 ± 0.8 | −0.9, − 0.2* |
Residents feel comfortable giving feedback to faculty on their teaching skills | 2.2 ± 1.1 | 2.7 ± 1.1 | 0.1, 1.0* |
Faculty ask for feedback on teaching skills | 1.6 ± 0.9 | 2.0 ± 1.0 | 0.1, 0.8 |
Faculty explicitly inform residents when they are giving feedback | 2.7 ± 0.9 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | −0.1, 0.6 |