Marleen Ottenhoff

78 Chapter 3 with three participants who did not participate in the main study. To address potential language issues we purposefully added a bilingual participant in the pilot study. Their comments were used to adjust and improve the instruments, including aspects related to language. Participants and setting We estimated beforehand that 26 participants would suffice, as literature concerning sample size in qualitative research argues that if the participant sample is not too heterogeneous, sufficient (i.e. 88%) saturation will usually be reached with 12 participants.45 Because we expected heterogeneity between the participants from the two medical schools and more homogeneity among the participants within each medical school, we decided to take 2x13 = 26 participants to be sure to include a sufficient number of participants. The participants in the respective medical schools were selected by a senior educator or sub-dean on the basis of their perceived expertise in teaching, based on student evaluations and obtained teaching awards. The rationale for this selection is that we were specifically interested in what the ‘best,’ most respected -and therefore influential- teaching academics believe about teacher qualities. Of the 13 academics selected at each of the two medical schools involved, five taught basic science topics and five clinical topics and most of them were responsible for curriculum content; three were involved in educational administration. Of the 26 originally selected faculty, only one was not able to participate and was replaced by another faculty member who met the criteria. The two medical schools were Stanford University School of Medicine (SUSM), California, USA, and Leiden University Medical Centre (LUMC), Leiden, The Netherlands. The interviews at SUSM took place in 2008, the interviews at LUMC in 2009/2010. Both medical schools are comparable in their emphasis on scientific education and had had their curricula redesigned in the decade prior to this study. At Stanford University School of Medicine a new preclinical curriculum was introduced in 2003. The hallmark of the new curriculum was the requirement for students to complete a Scholarly Concentration, a programme of study intended to integrate biomedical science, clinical medicine, and applied research in an area of a student’s personal interest. This component of the curriculum combined faculty-mentored research with structured coursework. The programme aimed to develop students’ skills essential for leadership in medicine and a lifelong commitment to cross-disciplinary investigation. The new curriculum also incorporated re-defined curriculum and increased time spent in direct patient-oriented learning. Classroom lectures were reduced

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw