77 From Critic to Inspirer 3 METHODS Design and procedure This exploratory, qualitative study consisted of four steps: the first step was largely deductive using Korthagen’s model as a template.42 In the second step subthemes were developed inductively. The third step consisted of qualitatively clustering academics into profiles. The final step consisted of a quantitative analysis of the relationship with contextual and personal factors as well as subthemes. The research is based on semi-structured interviews with medical academics, and is part of a larger research project exploring the longitudinal development of beliefs of medical academics about teaching, learning, knowledge, and teacher qualities, as, to date, the literature is not conclusive about if and how easily beliefs can change.8,43,44 In this study we report on the outcomes of the baseline study executed in 2008-2010 regarding beliefs about teacher qualities. The medical academics invited to participate were all staff involved in a preclinical curriculum. The preclinical curriculum comprised both basic sciences and clinical topics. To investigate whether discipline is an influencing contextual factor, an equal number of academics teaching basic science and clinical topics were recruited as participants. To gain insight into the influence of the organisation we also interviewed academics at the highest administrative level. The study was conducted at two different medical schools, one in the Netherlands and one in the United States to obtain a deeper understanding of the influence of (national) culture and educational organisation as contextual factors. To exclude interpersonal variations during the interviews all the interviews were conducted by the first author. We started with the primary interview question of what makes a good teacher, and subsequently used unstructured follow-up questions to encourage participants to elaborate further, with the aim of developing an in-depth holistic image of the beliefs of the interviewees. Participants were asked to respond within the context of their preclinical teaching, to exclude differences in course level as an influencing contextual factor. We encouraged them to reflect on their teaching practice and to illustrate their responses with examples. The interviews lasted on average one hour and were audio-taped and transcribed verbatim by a research assistant. Prior to the interview the participant completed a brief survey to collect demographic data, including contextual factors (the name of the medical school, discipline) and personal factors (years of teaching experience, gender, educational roles, and type of educational tasks). The interview protocol as well as the survey questions were tested in a pilot study
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw