122 Chapter 6 Instruments To comprehensively understand the effects of the prototype, we employed a combination of measures in a concurrent mixed-methods approach (33). Quantitative data were collected through surveys we developed for this study, following the course day and guided peer coaching to evaluate their: 1) experience of Self-Directed Learning as a way to stimulate their development (6 items); 2) improvement in active learning competencies (5 items); and 3) motivation to transfer (2 items). In this survey, we included items to measure ‘motivation to transfer’, an important precursor for actual transfer, as there were limited opportunities for transfer to have occurred (18). Qualitative data were collected through semi-structured interviews at the end of the semester by JWG or RG to explore how the design principles stimulated transfer and how the FDI achieved its effectiveness in developing participants’ active learning competencies. The interview guide can be found in Appendix 6.2. Finally, JWG attended each course day, guided peer coaching meeting, and several tutor meetings for observation purposes. The observations were used as prompts in interviews for deeper investigation of topics. To evaluate and improve the prototype, we decided to run two iterations, after which we felt that we had optimized the design, acquired understanding of the transfer process, and the effectiveness of the FDI. The first iteration started in August 2022 with fifteen participants. The second iteration started in February 2023 with nineteen participants. We collected data in the same way in the two iterations. Data analyses The quantitative data for both iterations were analyzed via descriptive statistics in IBM SPSS statistics (version 28). The qualitative data in the first iteration were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, following Kiger and Varpio’s six-step procedure (35), and using the design principles as sensitizing concepts. Resulting themes were used as a coding framework for qualitative data analyses in the second iteration. We then used Directed Content Analysis to corroborate the findings of the first iteration, while remaining open for new information (36). Following our pragmatic stance, all data were combined to answer the research question. Insights from each data source were assessed, compared to each other, and evaluated for their contribution to our understanding. Inconsistencies were discussed and resolved in the author team. Reflexivity We had extensive expertise in active learning, faculty development, educational design, educational research, and design-based research. Two authors had practical experience with the tutoring course: one was an experienced teacher of the course, while another was a medical student who had completed three years of the tutoring course. We valued the
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw