The relationship of tutors' content expertise to interventions and perceptions in a PBL medical curriculum.

Abstract

This study addressed three questions: (1) Do content-expert tutors differ from non-expert tutors in the extent to which they present/explain case content? (2) Do tutors who present/explain case content differ from those who almost never do in their ratings of various outcomes of a PBL curriculum? (3) Are tutors who present/explain case content rated differently by students from tutors who almost never do? Data were gathered from 88 tutors and 168 students in the first 2 years of a PBL medical curriculum. Students assessed their tutor after each unit, and tutors completed a questionnaire near the end of the academic year. In this study, 'content expertise' was defined operationally as tutors' self-ratings on the question 'To what extent could you teach (at the Med I level) the material covered in the cases?' Less than half of the tutors reported that they almost never presented/explained case content. As tutors' content expertise increased, they tended to present/explain case content more frequently. Tutors who almost never presented/explained case content rated PBL more highly than traditional methods. No differences were found in student ratings of tutors who almost never presented/explained case content, compared to tutors who did. The results suggest that tutors who are content experts find it difficult to maintain the 'facilitator' role, but that those who maintain this role are more satisfied with PBL. It appears that other tutor behaviours may have a greater influence on students' ratings of their tutors.