Keywords
Near-Peer Tutoring
Tutorial
Medical Education
Quality Improvement Project
How to Cite
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the desire and need for peer-to-peer tutoring programs at Division 1 Dell Medical School at the University of Texas.
Materials and Methods. Two sets of surveys were created and sent to students at the Dell Medical School, University of Texas, USA. One survey asking about the need or desire to engage with a peer tutor was sent to first-year students, and another one asking about the desire to provide these services to underclassmen as a potential leadership course option was sent to third-year students.
Results. For the first-year student survey, 52.9% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed of being aware of near-peer tutoring and 70.5% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that it would be an option utilized by students. For the third-year student survey, 75% of students either disagreed or felt neutral in being aware of near-peer tutoring as an option to serve underclassmen, whereas 65% of upperclassmen either agreed or strongly agreed that if near-peer tutoring had been offered, they would have chosen this leadership course option in the effort to teach their underclassmen peers.
Conclusions. Numerous studies have demonstrated peer-to-peer tutorial options to be of high utility to students in the medical education space. This particular paper obtained results demonstrating students’ desire to engage in peer tutoring voluntarily for their own course success goals and upperclassmen’s desire to participate as near-peer tutors for the benefit of underclassmen.
References
Nice warning: Incorrect use of IV drips causing fatalities [Internet]. HealthManagement.org. 2013 [cited 2022 Apr 18] Available from: https://healthmanagement.org/c/hospital/news/nice-warning-incorrect-use-of-iv-drips-causing-fatalities
Minto G, Mythen MG. Perioperative fluid management: science, art or random chaos? British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2015;114(5):717–721. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aev067
Foulkes D, Naylor S. Exploring peer tutoring from the peer tutor’s perspective. Radiography. 2022;28(3):793–797. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2022.02.007
Goodlad S, Hirst B. Peer tutoring. A guide to learning by teaching. London: Kogan Page; New York: Nichols Publishing; 1989. 184p.
Topping KJ. The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: a typology and review of the literature. Higher Education. 1996;32(3):321–345. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138870
Chang C-CJ, Rumrill S-M, Phillips A. Clinical Skills Tutoring Program (CSTP): developing a curriculum for medical student clinical skills peer tutors. MedEdPORTAL. 2022;18:11225. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.11225
Brierley C, Ellis L, Reid ER. Peer‐assisted learning in medical education: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Medical Education. 2021;56(4):365–373. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14672
Khalil MK. Weekly near-peer tutoring sessions improve students’ performance on basic medical sciences and USMLE Step1 examinations. Medical Teacher. 2022;44(7):752–757. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2027901
Lundberg A, Petersen-Brown S, Houlihan DD, Panahon C, Wagner D. Applying peer tutoring to spelling with elementary-aged students. Journal of Applied School Psychology. 2022;1–23. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2022.2052218
de la Hera DP, Zanoni MB, Sigman M, Calero CI. Peer tutoring of computer programming increases exploratory behavior in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2022;216:105335. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105335
Annis LF. The processes and effects of peer tutoring. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Applications. 1983:2(1):39–47.
Topping KJ. The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: a typology and review of the literature. Higher Education. 1996;32(3):321–345. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138870
Varkey TC, Merhavy ZI, Varkey RMJ, Ding JB, Varkey JA. Learning or memorization: self-directed medical school curriculum and the dangers of overemphasizing student selected ancillary resources. Galician Medical Journal. 2022;29(1):E202211. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21802/gmj.2022.1.1
Setia M. Methodology series module 3: cross-sectional studies. Indian Journal of Dermatology. 2016;61(3):261. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5154.182410
Shenoy A, Petersen KH. Peer tutoring in preclinical medical education: a review of the literature. Medical Science Educator. 2019;30(1):537–544. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-019-00895-y
Olaussen A, Reddy P, Irvine S, Williams B. Peer-assisted learning: time for nomenclature clarification. Medical Education Online. 2016;21(1):30974. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.30974
Blank WA, Blankenfeld H, Vogelmann R, Linde K, Schneider A. Can near-peer medical students effectively teach a new curriculum in physical examination? BMC Medical Education. 2013;13(1):165. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-13-165
Sprengel AD, Job L. Reducing student anxiety by using clinical peer mentoring with beginning nursing students. Nurse Educator. 2004 Nov;29(6):246–250. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006223-200411000-00010
Cheesman N. Doctors as teachers. BMJ. 2009;338:b1551. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b1551
Rodrigues V. Doctors as educators. In: Cavenagh P, Leinster SJ, Miles S, eds. The Changing Roles of Doctors. CRC Press; c2013. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781846199202-11
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.