The global variation of medical student engagement in teaching: Implications for medical electives

Abstract

Introduction International medical electives, whereby undergraduates visit an institution in a country other than their own, are a common part of medical training. Visiting students are often asked to provide local teaching, which may be acceptable where the visitor is acting within the bounds of their own competency and the normal practices of both their home and host institutions. However, the extent to which teaching is an accepted student activity globally has not previously been described. This study aims to address this using an international survey approach. Methods A voluntary electronic survey, created using the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES) framework, was distributed across established international medical student networks. This assessed the involvement of medical students in teaching and the educator training they receive, with the intention of comparing experiences between high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs) to gauge the engagement of both "host" and "visiting" students. Results 443 students from 61 countries completed the survey, with an equal proportion of respondents from LMICs (49.4%, 219/443) and HICs (50.6%, 224/443). Around two thirds of students reported providing teaching whilst at medical school, with most reporting teaching numerous times a year, mainly to more junior medical students. There was with no significant difference between LMICs and HICs. Around 30 per cent of all medical students

A Scoping Review of the Ethical Impacts of International Medical Electives on Local Students and Patient Care

“…The second group consisted of publications written by members of host institutions in LMICs, or based on interviews with them (5 papers) [2,25,28,35,36]. The third group was publications which were produced by neither of these groups, consisting primarily of editorials, systematic reviews, and guidelines written by universities (18 papers) [5][6][7][9][10][11][12][13][14]21,23,30,[37][38][39][40][41][42].…”

“…Secondly, steps could be undertaken by institutions to make exchange programmes mutually bene cial. This could be achieved through including members of host institutions in research collaborations, abstract or poster presentations [21], or peer-to-peer teaching [42]. Moreover, interviews with members of host institutions showed that the opportunity to send their own students to the institutions from which they are receiving visiting students would be the main improvement [36].…”

“…The importance of exchange of teaching and ideas between the institutions was also discussed [21,30,42]. One report of an elective partnership between UPenn and a hospital in Botswana suggested that this can be done through including the host institution in research, abstracts, and posters [21], while another paper focused on use of peer-to-peer teaching [42]. Some papers found that the lack of bene t to the host institution from accepting visiting students is largely due to inadequate preparation of visiting students prior to embarking on their elective placement, and the short duration of placement [30].…”

“…One-sided bene ts in partnership Some papers discussed the need for establishing bidirectional travel programmes as opposed to unilateral ones [2,24], and identi ed administrative, nancial and language barriers which can prevent students from LMICs from travelling to a HIC) [38]. The importance of exchange of teaching and ideas between the institutions was also discussed [21,30,42]. One report of an elective partnership between UPenn and a hospital in Botswana suggested that this can be done through including the host institution in research, abstracts, and posters [21], while another paper focused on use of peer-to-peer teaching [42].…”

Teaching Medical Students to Teach: A Narrative Review and Literature-Informed Recommendations for Student-as-Teacher Curricula

“…Despite evidence that UME programs routinely engage students in teaching roles, students are often not formally prepared for their teaching responsibilities. 5–7,48 Most SaT curricula identified in our literature review were offered as elective courses. Given that some UME accrediting bodies have identified teaching as a training expectation, 52–54 providing this training optionally or engaging students in teaching roles without prior training does not ensure widespread preparedness for future teaching roles.…”