123 Preparing medical teachers for small-group active learning different perspectives that the researchers brought to the study, while remaining aware that this may have influenced the design and evaluation of the prototype. Therefore, we attempted to remain reflexive throughout the research process and acknowledge our own subjectivity. Ethical aspects Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethical Review Board of the Netherlands Association for Medical Education (NVMO-ERB dossier number 2022.5.4). RESULTS The evaluation of the two iterations is described together here, to present the findings coherently and concisely. Table 6.1 presents the participant survey data for both iterations. The items on SDL were scored between 4.00 and 5.00 on a five-point scale, indicating that participants agreed that SDL was a good way to stimulate their development. Participants scored lower on the item regarding having a better understanding of personal strengths and areas for development (iteration 1: M = 3.87, SD = 0.92; iteration 2: M = 3.74, SD = 0.99). The items that measured participants’ improvement in facilitating active learning were all scored between 4.00 and 5.00. There was an increase in active learning facilitation competencies before and after the course day and guided peer coaching meeting in both iterations. Motivation to transfer was high, as participants scored items between 4.00 and 5.00. The interview data (N = 28) uncovered how, according to participants, Self-Directed Learning and the integration of on-the-job and off-the-job learning stimulated transfer. Three themes were identified: 1) Autonomy in creating personal learning objectives and learning process increased motivation to transfer, 2) Peer, supervisor and student support encouraged adoption of new teaching strategies, 3) Integrating on-the-job experiences and off-the-job meetings promoted a continuous learning cycle of experiencing, reflecting, understanding, and applying. 6
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw