PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Informal workplace learning (WPL) has no concrete learning objective and takes place without a responsible supervisor, which makes it difficult to assess its learning outcomes. Formal learning situations, as they are known from universities or schools, do not exist in this context and make a conventional assessment of learning goals and achievements impossible. Informal learning in the workplace is of central importance, and the assessment of informal learning outcomes in medical education is an under-researched area. The aim of our study was to adapt and validate an informal WPL questionnaire (originally developed for social workers) to assess learning outcomes due to informal WPL in residency training.
METHODS: A total of 528 residents (n = 339 female; age: M = 29.79; SD = 3.37 years) completed an adapted questionnaire on informal WPL outcomes and the Freiburg Questionnaire to Assess Competencies in Medicine (i.e. medical knowledge, communication, and scholarship). Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine the underlying factor structure. The reliability of the factors was tested using McDonald\'s omega, and the correlation between the factors and the three subscales of the Freiburg questionnaire was tested using Spearman\'s rho correlation coefficient. To investigate construct validity, a structural equation model was calculated to examine the relationships between medical competencies and informal learning outcomes.
RESULTS: The exploratory factor analysis yielded a four-factor solution that best fit the data. The scores of all four factors (GLO-CD: generic learning outcomes-competence development, GLO-R: generic learning outcomes-reflection, JSLO: job-specific learning outcomes, and OLLO: organisational learning outcomes) showed good internal consistency (Ω ≥ .69). The structural equation model showed that \"medical expertise\" had an impact on all four factors of informal learning at work. \"Scholarship\" seemed to predict GLO-CD and GLO-R.
CONCLUSIONS: Our four-factor model reveals meaningful determinants of informal WPL in relation to residency training. The instrument is therefore the first promising attempt to assess informal WPL in the broader context of medical education during residency, thus supporting its construct validity.
METHODS: A total of 528 residents (n = 339 female; age: M = 29.79; SD = 3.37 years) completed an adapted questionnaire on informal WPL outcomes and the Freiburg Questionnaire to Assess Competencies in Medicine (i.e. medical knowledge, communication, and scholarship). Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine the underlying factor structure. The reliability of the factors was tested using McDonald\'s omega, and the correlation between the factors and the three subscales of the Freiburg questionnaire was tested using Spearman\'s rho correlation coefficient. To investigate construct validity, a structural equation model was calculated to examine the relationships between medical competencies and informal learning outcomes.
RESULTS: The exploratory factor analysis yielded a four-factor solution that best fit the data. The scores of all four factors (GLO-CD: generic learning outcomes-competence development, GLO-R: generic learning outcomes-reflection, JSLO: job-specific learning outcomes, and OLLO: organisational learning outcomes) showed good internal consistency (Ω ≥ .69). The structural equation model showed that \"medical expertise\" had an impact on all four factors of informal learning at work. \"Scholarship\" seemed to predict GLO-CD and GLO-R.
CONCLUSIONS: Our four-factor model reveals meaningful determinants of informal WPL in relation to residency training. The instrument is therefore the first promising attempt to assess informal WPL in the broader context of medical education during residency, thus supporting its construct validity.
摘要：
背景：非正式工作场所学习（WPL）没有具体的学习目标，并且在没有负责任的主管的情况下进行，这使得很难评估其学习成果。正式的学习情况，正如他们从大学或学校所知，在这种情况下不存在，并且不可能对学习目标和成就进行常规评估。工作场所的非正式学习至关重要，医学教育中非正式学习成果的评估是一个研究不足的领域。我们研究的目的是调整和验证非正式的WPL问卷（最初为社会工作者开发），以评估住院医师培训中非正式WPL的学习成果。
方法：共有528名居民（n=339名女性；年龄：M=29.79；SD=3.37岁）完成了关于非正式WPL结果的适应性问卷和评估医学能力的弗莱堡问卷（即医学知识，通信,和奖学金）。探索性因素分析用于确定潜在的因素结构。使用麦当劳的欧米茄测试了这些因素的可靠性，用Spearman的rho相关系数检验各因子与弗莱堡问卷三个分量表之间的相关性。为了调查结构效度，我们计算了一个结构方程模型来检验医疗能力和非正式学习结果之间的关系.
结果：探索性因素分析得出了一个最符合数据的四因素解决方案。所有四个因素的分数(GLO-CD：通用学习成果-能力发展，GLO-R：通用学习成果-反思，JSLO：特定工作的学习成果，和OLLO：组织学习成果）显示出良好的内部一致性（Ω≥.69）。结构方程模型表明，“医学专业”对工作中非正式学习的所有四个因素都有影响。“奖学金”似乎可以预测GLO-CD和GLO-R。
结论：我们的四因素模型揭示了与住院医师培训相关的非正式WPL的有意义的决定因素。因此，该工具是在住院期间医学教育的更广泛背景下评估非正式WPL的第一个有希望的尝试，从而支持其结构效度。
方法：共有528名居民（n=339名女性；年龄：M=29.79；SD=3.37岁）完成了关于非正式WPL结果的适应性问卷和评估医学能力的弗莱堡问卷（即医学知识，通信,和奖学金）。探索性因素分析用于确定潜在的因素结构。使用麦当劳的欧米茄测试了这些因素的可靠性，用Spearman的rho相关系数检验各因子与弗莱堡问卷三个分量表之间的相关性。为了调查结构效度，我们计算了一个结构方程模型来检验医疗能力和非正式学习结果之间的关系.
结果：探索性因素分析得出了一个最符合数据的四因素解决方案。所有四个因素的分数(GLO-CD：通用学习成果-能力发展，GLO-R：通用学习成果-反思，JSLO：特定工作的学习成果，和OLLO：组织学习成果）显示出良好的内部一致性（Ω≥.69）。结构方程模型表明，“医学专业”对工作中非正式学习的所有四个因素都有影响。“奖学金”似乎可以预测GLO-CD和GLO-R。
结论：我们的四因素模型揭示了与住院医师培训相关的非正式WPL的有意义的决定因素。因此，该工具是在住院期间医学教育的更广泛背景下评估非正式WPL的第一个有希望的尝试，从而支持其结构效度。
