4.5 Article

Growth mindset in competency-based medical education

期刊

MEDICAL TEACHER
卷 43, 期 7, 页码 751-757

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2021.1928036

关键词

Clinical; teaching and learning; clinical; work-based; management; role of teacher; learning outcomes; general; assessment; clinical

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The widespread adoption of CBME highlights the importance of learner-centred educational design and fostering a growth mindset in learners. Challenges include shifting away from the fixed mindset of traditional medical education, with potential solutions discussed at individual, relational, and systems levels. Future research directions aim to better understand the growth mindset within the context of CBME.
The ongoing adoption of competency-based medical education (CBME) across health professions training draws focus to learner-centred educational design and the importance of fostering a growth mindset in learners, teachers, and educational programs. An emerging body of literature addresses the instructional practices and features of learning environments that foster the skills and strategies necessary for trainees to be partners in their own learning and progression to competence and to develop skills for lifelong learning. Aligned with this emerging area is an interest in Dweck's self theory and the concept of the growth mindset. The growth mindset is an implicit belief held by an individual that intelligence and abilities are changeable, rather than fixed and immutable. In this paper, we present an overview of the growth mindset and how it aligns with the goals of CBME. We describe the challenges associated with shifting away from the fixed mindset of most traditional medical education assumptions and practices and discuss potential solutions and strategies at the individual, relational, and systems levels. Finally, we present future directions for research to better understand the growth mindset in the context of CBME.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据