Why Limit TBL to Students? TBL Also Engages the Clinician Attending CME (Continuing Medical Education)
Julie Mitchell, MD MS (1), Joan Neuner, MD MPH (1), Jennifer Zebrack, MD (2) and Robert Treat, PhD (1) (1) Medical College of Wisconsin and (2) University of Nevada-Reno
BACKGROUND: Practicing general internists are required to accrue continuing medical education credits to maintain their licensure. Among others, the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) annual meeting offers many workshops for members to update their clinical skills and accrue CME based on the number of hours attended (and not their performance or knowledge attained).
DESCRIPTION: Three medical school faculty members (JM, JN, and JZ) presented a clinical update in vitamin D deficiency to about 90 participants at the 2009 Annual SGIM meeting. The presentation was 90 minutes. 99 participants had pre-registered; these participants received reading material in advance of the conference by email. The principles and methods of TBL were introduced briefly in the advance readings and at the beginning of the presentation. Participants chose their groups by seating themselves at 12 round tables. Groups of 6-8 participants completed IRATs, GRATs, and application exercises in the usual manner.
EVALUATION: The workshop received an overall rating of 4.56 on a 5-point scale, above the average for all workshops (4.38). Raters indicated better than average quality of content, amount of material covered, and audiovisual materials. The audience interaction was rated an above-average 4.70 (average 4.37) while the audience size was rated “optimal” despite the high student-teacher ratio. 81% found the workshop “very likely” or “extremely likely” to concretely change their patient care. Qualitative analysis revealed a strong connection between the teaching method and being engaged in learning.
CONCLUSIONS: A one-time, 90-minute presentation using the principles of TBL engaged post-graduate learners despite a large student-teacher ratio.
