critical thinking doctoral student

Robert E. Levasseur, PhD

Blog Categories

Collaborative Meeting Management
Decision Making
Doctoral Study
High Performance Team Building
Hiking and Nature
Leadership and Change
Lifelong Learning

Critical Thinking at the Doctoral Level

What does it mean to exercise critical thinking? Does it mean to be negative and adversarial? Does it mean to provide constructive criticism? Or does it mean something totally different? To explore the nature of critical thinking, we begin by examining the concept of left and right brain thinking.

Left and Right Brain Thinking

Brain research suggests that the left and right sides of the brain have distinct and complementary functions. Simply put, the left brain is the seat of logic and, hence, analytical thinking, and the right brain is the seat of intuition and, hence, system thinking.

So, is critical thinking left-brained, analytical thinking, or is it right-brained, system thinking?

Lower vs. Higher-order Thinking

differentiate the work of students from scholars, academics use a framework called Bloom’s Taxonomy. According to Benjamin Bloom, there are multiple levels of thinking.

They follow a hierarchy from the lowest to the highest order or level:

Comprehension

Application

New doctoral students tend to focus on the lower level skills since the educational system at the levels below the doctorate tend to emphasize their use.

As a doctoral student, however, your work must reflect all levels of thinking, particularly the higher-order thinking skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. In addition, your work should incorporate a whole-brain approach that uses right-brained, systemic thinking to support left-brained, analytical thinking, and vice-versa.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
14 February 2018

Train PhD students to be thinkers not just specialists

Gundula Bosch 0

Gundula Bosch directs the R3 Graduate Science Initiative at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland.

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Under pressure to turn out productive lab members quickly, many PhD programmes in the biomedical sciences have shortened their courses, squeezing out opportunities for putting research into its wider context. Consequently, most PhD curricula are unlikely to nurture the big thinkers and creative problem-solvers that society needs.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 554 , 277 (2018)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-01853-1

Reprints and permissions

What I learnt from running a coding bootcamp

Career Column 21 AUG 24

The Taliban said women could study — three years on they still can’t

News 14 AUG 24

The Taliban ‘took my life’ — scientists who fled takeover speak out

News 09 AUG 24

ATLAS - Joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine

5 PhD positions for ATLAS, the joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine.

Mainz, Rheinland-Pfalz (DE)

Translational Oncology (TRON) Mainz

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Researcher/Associate Researcher

Xiaoliang Sunney XIE’s Group is recruiting researchers specializing in Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Beijing, China

Changping Laboratory

Supervisory Bioinformatics Specialist CTG Program Head

The National Library of Medicine (NLM) is a global leader in biomedical informatics and computational health data science and the world’s largest b...

Bethesda, Maryland (US)

National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information

Post Doctoral Research Scientist

Post-Doctoral Research Scientist Position in Human Transplant Immunology at the Columbia Center for Translational Immunology in New York, NY

New York City, New York (US)

Columbia Center for Translational Immunoogy

Postdoctoral Associate- Neuromodulation and Computational Psychiatry

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Graduate Journey Resource Center

Discover valuable resources to assist you in your program search and decision-making process.

The Importance of Critical Thinking in Grad School (and Everywhere Else)

Philosophers such as Plato and Socrates have waxed about the art of critical thinking for ages. The ability to make well-informed, conscious decisions based on information and thoughtful reflection before acting or expressing an opinion is a skill that has always been highly valued. In today’s landscape of information overload and dubious sources, the art of critical thinking has become more challenging. Some would even say it has become a lost art.

However, in the worlds of graduate school and employment, the ability to think critically has become an important soft skill that both graduate program admissions committees and companies are looking for.

Why is critical thinking so important?

The ability to think independently from outside forces, including those in positions of power and authority, is a valuable skill that can lead to innovative ideas, productive and engaging debate, and promote leadership skills that are invaluable both in the classroom and the workspace. Contemplating a topic in an objective way, evaluating various points of view, and recognizing the strengths and weaknesses within an issue, all enable an individual to successfully navigate say, a challenging graduate program or a leadership position within a company.

In fact, 60% of hiring managers feel that critical thinking is the most lacking soft skill among college graduates. And, despite its allegedly inadequate levels amongst students, it’s also one of the most desired when looking for a successful candidate. It allows you to engage in effective problem solving, decision making, productive and sound judgements of peers, professors and clients, and to focus on the facts in any situation without becoming distracted by debatable influences or sources.

If you just blindly accept every piece of information you are presented with without vetting it and analyzing its worth and legitimacy, then how can you expect others to trust your decision-making, leadership or research skills? And the benefits to having and employing these skills will certainly extend beyond the classroom, lab or office and into your personal life as well as you navigate the information onslaught that likely invades your phone and computer daily.

This is why many universities and companies are beginning to assess soft skills, such as critical thinking, as part of a holistic evaluation of a prospective candidate.

How to become a critical thinker

Much of the groundwork for critical thinking can be learned both at home and in school from a very young age. This, of course, would depend on whether you were raised to question things or just do as you were told. The school system, from the elementary level on, is also an environment in which critical thinking skills can not only be taught — but encouraged. Teaching and reinforcing critical thinking skills from an early age benefits students when they eventually enter the higher ed world.

As you contemplate grad school, you may feel that your critical thinking skills could be improved. There are plenty of ways to teach yourself how to be a better critical thinker using several resources from books to mini courses to situational prompts.

Ensuring your critical thinking skills are up to par won’t just make you a more viable grad school applicant but may in fact help you choose the best program for you. In general, accepting things at face value without any introspection or investigation can be detrimental when forming opinions or deciding to act on something. As a true critical thinker, you aren’t only questioning outside opinions and information, but your own opinions as well. You put everything you know, or think you know, on trial to come up with a conclusion based on intelligent contemplation and facts.

The bottom line

Think of critical thinking skills this way: If a plate of smoking hot food is set before you, you don’t just start eating because the person who put it in front of you told you it was safe to consume. You test it first and make sure it won’t burn you. If you apply that same logic to the information that is put in front of you, whether learning in a classroom, working as a professional or watching the news, you will feel more confident in your decisions and opinions, as will those around you.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-8411-9.CH015
Corpus ID: 157719046

Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions

Peter Smith
Published 2015

3 Citations

Facilitating the development of higher-order thinking skills (hots) of novice nursing postgraduates in africa., driving change: guidelines for developing graduate programs to meet high international standards.

Highly Influenced

A Qualitative Deconstruction of Consumerism: The Case of Lost Community

46 references, influences affecting the development of students' critical thinking skills, infusing the mentorship model of education for the promotion of critical thinking in doctoral education, critical thinking skills: a comparison of doctoral- and master's-level students, how are doctoral students supervised concepts of doctoral research supervision, the role of an effective student: case studies at the university of manchester, united kingdom, the purpose of the phd: theorising the skills acquired by students, ‘peer learning’ as pedagogic discourse for research education 1, research training and supervision development, using writing to develop and assess critical thinking, to prove myself at the highest level: the benefits of doctoral study, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Conditions for Criticality in Doctoral Education: A Creative Concern

Cite this chapter.

Eva M. Brodin

5416 Accesses

2 Citations

The demand for developing profound critical thinking in doctoral education is a serious concern since today’s doctoral students are the academics and societal leaders of tomorrow. Thus they need to be well prepared for handling the rapid changes of academia, and society at large, in deliberate, transformative, and responsible ways. Such a concern extends beyond the traditional understanding of critical thinking in terms of critical reasoning. It also involves critical self-reflection and critical action (Barnett 1997). Underpinned by a range of scholars who argue for a close relationship between critical and creative thinking (Baer and Kaufman 2006), I shall in this chapter argue that criticality of this all-embracing kind involves an ample amount of creativity.

One of the supervisors said: “Yes, we’re going to reshape you here.” It seems as if that is what they do in doctoral education, they make us into researchers … I mean, make us think in another way. And you could say that they’ve succeeded with that in my case: I mean with the critical thinking. What you learn is that you need to be critical of everything—everything you read. And I suppose that’s the point with these seminars; it has to be, that you discuss the texts and critically reflect upon them. (Interview with doctoral student in pedagogical work, Pe1)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology

Australian teachers’ adoption of critical and creative thinking as curriculum.

A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education

Arendt, H. 1958. The Human Condition . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar

Baer, J., and Kaufman, J. C. 2006.“Conclusions.” In Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development , edited by J. C. Kaufman and J. Baer Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 351–355.

Chapter Google Scholar

Bailin, S. 1993. “Epilogue: Problems in Conceptualizing Good Thinking.” American Behavioral Scientist , 37 (1): 156–164.

Article Google Scholar

Barnett, R. 1997. Higher Education: A Critical Business . Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & the Open University Press.

Bennich-Björkman, L. 1997. Organising Innovative Research: The Inner Life of University Departments . Oxford : Published for the IAU Press [by] Pergamon.

Boyer, E. L. 1990. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brodin, E. M. 2008. Critical Thinking in Scholarship: Meanings, Conditions and Development . (Revised edition). Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr Müller.

Brodin, E. M. 2014. “Critical and Creative Thinking Nexus: Learning Experiences of Doctoral Students.” Studies in Higher Education , DOI: 10.1080/03075079.2014.943656 .

Brodin, E. M., and Avery, H. 2014. “Conditions for Scholarly Creativity in Interdisciplinary Doctoral Education through an Aristotelian Lens.” In Creativity Research: An Inter-Disciplinary and Multi-Disciplinary Research Handbook , edited by E. Shiu. London: Routledge. 273–294.

Brodin, E. M., and Frick, B. L. 2011. “Conceptualizing and Encouraging Critical Creativity in Doctoral Education.” International Journal for Researcher Development 2 (2): 133–151.

Brookfield, S. D. 1987. Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dellgran, P., and Höjer, S. 2011. “Nya trender och gamla mönster: Doktorsavhandlingarna i socialt arbete 1980–2009.” [New trends and old patterns: The doctoral theses in social work 1980–2009.] Socialvetenskaplig tidskrift 2: 85–105.

Fasko, D. Jr. 2006. “Creative Thinking and Reasoning: Can You Have the One without the Other?” In Creativity and Reason in Cognitive Development , edited by J. C. B. Kaufman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 159–176.

Frick, B. L. 2010. “Creativity in Doctoral Education: Conceptualising the Original Contribution.” In Teaching Creativity—Creativity in Teaching , edited by C. Nygaard, N. Courtney, and C. Holtham. Faringdon: Libri Publishing. 15–32.

Golde, C. 2010. “Entering Different Worlds: Socialization into Disciplinary Communities.” In On Becoming a Scholar: Socialization and Development in Doctoral Education , edited by S. K. Gardner and P. Mendoza. Sterling, VA: Stylus. 79–95.

Humphrey, R. and Simpson, B. 2012. “Writes of Passage: Writing up Qualitative Data as a Threshold Concept in Doctoral Research.” Teaching in Higher Education 17 (6): 735–746.

Jackson, N., and Shaw, M. 2006. “Developing Subject Perspectives on Creativity in Higher Education. In Developing Creativity in Higher Education: An Imaginative Curriculum , edited by N. Jackson, M. Oliver, M. Shaw, and J. Wisdom. London: Routledge. 89–108.

Kiley, M. 2009. “Identifying Threshold Concepts and Proposing Strategies to Support Doctoral Candidates.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 46 (3): 293–304.

Kiley, M. and Wisker, G. 2009. “Threshold Concepts in Research Education and Evidence of Threshold Crossing.” Higher Education Research and Development 28 (4): 431–441.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Land, R., Meyer, J.H.F., and Smith, J. (Eds.). 2008. Threshold Concepts within the Disciplines . Rotterdam: Sense.

Lee, A., and Boud, D. 2009. “Framing Doctoral Education as Practice.” In Changing Practices of Doctoral Education , edited by D. Boud and A. Lee. Abingdon, Oxon, New York: Routledge. 10–25.

Lovitts, B. E. 2005. “Being a Good Course-Taker Is Not Enough: A Theoretical Perspective on the Transition to Independent Research.” Studies in Higher Education 30 (2): 137–154.

Lovitts, B. E. 2007. Making the Implicit Explicit: Creating Performance Expectations for the Dissertation . Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Lovitts, B. E. 2008. “The Transition to Independent Research: Who Makes It, Who Doesn’t, and Why.” Journal of Higher Education 79 (3): 296–325.

McCormack, B., and Titchen, A. 2006. “Critical Creativity: Melding, Exploding, Blending.” Educational Action Research 14 (2): 239–266.

Meyer, J.H.F., and Land, R. (Eds.). 2006. Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding: Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge . Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Moore, T. 2013. “Critical Thinking: Seven Definitions in Search of a Concept.” Studies in Higher Education 38 (4): 506–522.

Mullins, G., and Kiley, M. 2002. “‘It’s a PhD, Not a Nobel Prize’: How Experienced Examiners Assess Research Theses.” Studies in Higher Education 27 (4): 369–386.

Ragsdell, G. 1998. “Participatory Action Research and the Development of Critical Creativity: A ‘Natural’ Combination?” Systemic Practice and Action Research 11 (5): 503–515.

Ragsdell, G. 2001. “From Creative Thinking to Organisational Learning via Systems Thinking? An Illustration of Critical Creativity.” Creativity and Innovation Management 10 (2): 102–109.

Sjöstedt Landén, A. (2012). Sammanläggningsavhandling i monografisk tradition? Reflektioner kring metod och etik. [Thesis by publication in monographic tradition? Reflections upon methods and ethics.] In Mitt i metoden: Kulturvetenskapliga reflektioner , edited by B. Nilsson and A. S. Lundgren. Umeå: Institutionen för kultur- och medievetenskaper, Umeå universitet. 71–82.

Sternberg, R. J., and Lubart, T. I. 1995. Defying the Crowd: Cultivating Creativity in a Culture of Conformity . New York: The Free Press.

Titchen, A., and McCormack, B. 2010. “Dancing with Stones: Critical Creativity as Methodology for Human Flourishing.” Educational Action Research 18 (4): 531–554.

Trafford, V. and Leshem, S. 2009. “Doctorateness as a threshold concept.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 46 (3): 305–316.

Vetenskapsrådet. (2006). Svenska avhandlingars kvalitét och struktur: Har den ökade volymen på forskarutbildningen påverkat kvalitén på svensk forskning? En bibliometrisk analys . [Quality and structure of Swedish dissertations: Has the increased volume of doctoral education influenced the quality of Swedish research? A bibliometric analysis]. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.

Walters, K. S. 1994. “Introduction: Beyond Logicism in Critical Thinking.” In Re-Thinking Reason: New Perspectives in Critical Thinking , edited by K. S. Walters. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Weidman, J. C. 2010. “Doctoral Student Socialization for Research.” In On Becoming a Scholar: Socialization and Development in Doctoral Education , edited by S. K. Gardner and P. Mendoza. Sterling, VA: Stylus. 45–55.

Wisker, G., and Robinson, G. 2009. “Encouraging Postgraduate Students of Literature and Art to Cross Conceptual Thresholds.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 46 (3): 317–330.

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

About this chapter

Brodin, E.M. (2015). Conditions for Criticality in Doctoral Education: A Creative Concern. In: Davies, M., Barnett, R. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_17

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_17

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, New York

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-47812-5

Online ISBN : 978-1-137-37805-7

eBook Packages : Palgrave Education Collection Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Get IGI Global News

All Products
Book Chapters
Journal Articles
Video Lessons
Teaching Cases
Recommend to Librarian
Recommend to Colleague
Fair Use Policy

Access on Platform

Export Reference

Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development
e-Book Collection
Education e-Book Collection
e-Book Collection Select
Transformative Practice in Higher Education Collection - e-Books
Education Knowledge Solutions e-Book Collection

Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions

It is generally accepted (van den Brink-Budgen, 2006) that the basis of critical thinking is the argument, and the reasoning behind that argument. Similarly, a doctorate is also about a thesis, which is itself; a reasoned argument. Doctoral study is all about researching to find the evidence to back up the reasoning behind the thesis, or the argument. Facione (1998) proposes that there are six core critical thinking skills: interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and self-regulation. All of these skills are evident within doctoral studies. However, on reflection, the author realises that critical thinking is also one of the most difficult skills to develop, or teach, and one of the things that students find most challenging about their doctoral studies.

Much has been written about critical thinking, and the need to develop this in students (Beyers, 1995; Paul, 1995; Terenzini et al, 1995). Surprisingly, however given the nature of the doctorate, little has been written about the development of critical thinking in doctoral students. King et al (1990) discuss the issue of assessing critical thinking in graduate students, noting that there is little agreement as to what constitutes critical thinking. Onwuegbuzie (2001) compared critical thinking skills in Master's and doctoral students and concluded that, as might be expected, the doctoral students exhibited considerably greater criticality than the Master's students. Zipp and Olson (2011) discuss the role of mentors in promoting critical thinking in doctoral students and conclude that ‘good mentors lead students on a journey that forever changes the ways in which they think and act’.

Key Terms in this Chapter

Thesis : An academic document which a higher degree student produces to report on their project. This is the normal means of assessment for the degree of PhD.

Reflection : The action of thinking and analysing one’s actions in order to learn for the future.

Viva : An oral examination of a higher degree (e.g. a PhD).

Action Research : A research approach which involves iterations of practical action, followed by reflection.

Doctorate : A higher degree obtained by research.

Professional Doctorate : A practice-based research degree.

Supervisor : A member of academic staff supporting a higher degree student.

Complete Chapter List

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings
My Bibliography
Collections
Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design using problem-based learning

Affiliations.

1 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center 64 Medical Center Drive, P.O. Box 9142, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA. [email protected].
2 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center 64 Medical Center Drive, P.O. Box 9142, Morgantown, WV, 26506, USA.
PMID: 37587476
PMCID: PMC10428545
DOI: 10.1186/s12909-023-04569-7

Background: Traditionally, doctoral student education in the biomedical sciences relies on didactic coursework to build a foundation of scientific knowledge and an apprenticeship model of training in the laboratory of an established investigator. Recent recommendations for revision of graduate training include the utilization of graduate student competencies to assess progress and the introduction of novel curricula focused on development of skills, rather than accumulation of facts. Evidence demonstrates that active learning approaches are effective. Several facets of active learning are components of problem-based learning (PBL), which is a teaching modality where student learning is self-directed toward solving problems in a relevant context. These concepts were combined and incorporated in creating a new introductory graduate course designed to develop scientific skills (student competencies) in matriculating doctoral students using a PBL format.

Methods: Evaluation of course effectiveness was measured using the principals of the Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluation. At the end of each course offering, students completed evaluation surveys on the course and instructors to assess their perceptions of training effectiveness. Pre- and post-tests assessing students' proficiency in experimental design were used to measure student learning.

Results: The analysis of the outcomes of the course suggests the training is effective in improving experimental design. The course was well received by the students as measured by student evaluations (Kirkpatrick Model Level 1). Improved scores on post-tests indicate that the students learned from the experience (Kirkpatrick Model Level 2). A template is provided for the implementation of similar courses at other institutions.

Conclusions: This problem-based learning course appears effective in training newly matriculated graduate students in the required skills for designing experiments to test specific hypotheses, enhancing student preparation prior to initiation of their dissertation research.

Keywords: Critical thinking; Doctoral Student; Experimental design; Graduate; Problem-based learning; Training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Related information

Grants and funding.

T32 GM133369/GM/NIGMS NIH HHS/United States

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

BioMed Central
Europe PubMed Central
PubMed Central

Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Critical thinking – the hardest doctoral skill of all?

I’m in the enviable position of having a blog with a wide readership (thank you) which means I get sent review copies by publishers. Everyone at work gets jealous when a book package arrives and I feel like a rock star. This is a good feeling.

On the other hand, there are only so many hours in the day I can devote to reading these books. I have a lot of reading to just to keep up to date with my field, not to mention the ‘non academic’ stuff. Last month one of the committees I sit on had 135 pages in the agenda pack. As the blog has grown in popularity, publishers have sent books in at an increasing rate. I give some to students to review, but it’s hard to convince people to devote the time and the task falls to me.

As a consequence I have started to accumulate a TBR (to be read) Pile of Guilt on my desk.

The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education has caused me the most reviewer guilt since the first one I ever received ( Mapping your Thesis in case you were wondering ). In my defence, it’s an intimidating book. For a start, it’s a weighty tome – let me show you:

Each chapter seemed to suggest ways to help candidates develop that most difficult of all doctoral skills: critical thinking. We don’t bother devoting a lot of time to develop critical thinking at the doctoral level because we assume you already have that ability, which is a shame because it’s an interesting topic. I used to run an online course about critical and creative thinking at my last employer and had great conversations with PhD students from all around Australia.

What is critical thinking, really? The book has loads of ideas. Sometimes I would open the book and read the table of contents, wistfully dreaming of a time I could read the whole thing from cover to cover. However, after months and months, I had to regretfully concede that this was a plan I could action only if I was actually retired (I have a lot of retirement fantasies about finally reading every book on my shelf, I’m sure you can all relate).

Since I have no plans of actually retiring soon, I decided to focus my review on a close reading of only one chapter “Conditions for criticality in Doctoral Education: a creative concern”, by Eva Brodin, because it is the chapter most closely concerned with the theme of this blog.

Brodin starts by outlining all the different ways that academics think about critical thinking. When interviewed academics understand critical thinking as a bunch of related, but different things:

Originality
Sensitivity
Rationality
Reflexivity

No wonder everyone is confused, right?

Brodin goes on to sketch links between critical and creative thinking, starting with Brookfield (1987)* who positions critical thinking as a reflexive process where people critically examine “habitual actions, values, beliefs and moral codes” in order to “liberate themselves from uncongenial ways of living” (don’t you love the use of ‘uncongenial’ in that sentence? I feel like I am in a Jane Austen novel… That’s a compliment by the way). She goes on to quote Barnett (1997)**, who makes the claim that critical thinking involves “the creation of imaginary alternatives”. Brodin uses the term “critical creativity” to try to capture the relationship between critical thinking and creative thinking.

I imagine that I have probably lost a few readers by this point, but try to stay with me because there’s an important point coming up I promise.

Is critical thinking just about thinking though?

This is where she makes the call for PhD candidates to direct critical thinking at the academic setting itself. This, she claims, is crucial to developing a scholarly identity. If we were to really critically think, reflect and act on the conditions of academia and scholarly work as we find it, what might be the result?

This is where Brodin brings in Hannah Arendt’s theory of labour. According to Arendt, labour is “an endless process of drudgery, which is necessary for survival”. Brodin gives the example of housework, which I think is highly appropriate for describing a lot of what academic work looks like. It’s endless, the results (a clean sink, a dust free surface) are never stable, fixed, done – even when you retire it seems. As Pat Thomson put it, the writing work is never done: there’s always another paper, then another, then another .

(Side note: handing in the thesis is one of the rare moments of academia where you feel a sense of completion. Like a book, a thesis is a writing job that can be genuinely ticked off as done, so enjoy the moment when it happens)

According to Brodin’s reading of Arendt, the value of the work has come to be located in the process, not the product. This might explain why academia seems so obsessed with metrics. Measuring academic output has become an end in itself, a game that you are constantly forced to play if you want to be considered a ‘real academic’. It used to be that being a ‘real academic’ involved publishing in the ‘best’ journals, appearing at ‘the best’ conferences. A lot of my colleagues hold on to this idea of what an academic is, but nothing stays the same, even in academia.

When I started blogging (almost exactly 6 years ago according to my first ever post ), it felt like liberation. A space where I could give voice to my thoughts outside academic journals with their stilted language and lack of appreciation for Star Wars references . But the rise of the ‘impact agenda’ and altmetrics in the UK and my recent experience with applying for a promotion, using the blog as the main pillar of my argument for evidence of peer esteem, has made me question all that.

Having an academic blog that people actually read is no longer just edgy-cool, it’s a legitimate career asset. Blogging, as I said to a friend the other day, is the new black. I used to think that when blogs start to ‘count’, that a victory of sorts would be achieved. Now I’m not so sure. Maybe the definition of academic work is just getting broader. This can be good and bad. As Pat pointed out in a Skype conversation not so long ago, we can be screwed by alt metrics as easily as by conventional metrics. Academics are under real pressure to start blogging as yet another way to make their work ‘count’.

If publishing is the route to legitimising oneself as an academic, of becoming ‘real’, one of the biggest challenges for any PhD student today is how to position themselves as a public writer. Publishing in ‘the best’ journals is, still, a conventional expectation, but what about blogging? Should you do it?

Pat and I are doing research based on 280 odd responses to our questionnaire on PhD student blogging last year. I’ve been coding the data in Dedoose and the overwhelming impression I get is ambivalence. Many respondents were enthusiastic and committed to the practice of blogging of course, but almost all of them had reservations about the value of it. These reservations seem to cluster around how they appear to others. Will they be seen as ‘unscholarly’, a ‘show pony’, a ‘time waster’? In her chapter, Brodin notes that similar fears plague thesis writers who, seek the safety of known formulas for writing a thesis for fear of being judged as ‘not real scholars’.

What Brodin is encouraging us to do throughout this chapter is to develop what she calls a ‘questioning approach’ to the work of being an academic. Well, mission accomplished Eva! I’m impressed by you Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education .

So, should you buy this book? I do endorse books and products on the blog, but none of my posts are infomercials (as one commenter suggested in response to my recent post about Omnifocus! ). The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education is an excellent book for someone like me, but I don’t think it has a place on a thesis writer’s shelf, unless you happen to be writing a thesis about critical thinking of course! It’s the kind of book aimed at libraries and I hope many buy it.

The two best books on doing a thesis

Book review: Writing for peer reviewed journals

Book review: How to write a lot

Whisper to me....

Enter your email address to get posts by email.

Email Address

Sign me up!

On the reg: a podcast with @jasondowns
Thesis Whisperer on Facebook
Thesis Whisperer on Instagram
Thesis Whisperer on Soundcloud
Thesis Whisperer on Youtube
Thesiswhisperer on Mastodon
Thesiswhisperer page on LinkedIn
Thesiswhisperer Podcast
12,216,128 hits

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Professional Presentation/Defense

Professional Presentation/Defense: Home
Preparations for Professional Presentation and Defense
Sample Presentations and Defenses
Publishing in ProQuest

What are Educator Dispositions?

Dispositions checklist for soe doctoral students, note: content on this page applies to students in the school of education only..

Assessing doctoral students' dispositions focuses on their attitudes, beliefs, interests, values, and ethics reflected in their behaviors toward those individuals with whom they interact. Dispositions continue to be one of the three evaluative areas for professional educators (knowledge, dispositions, and performances) (Council of Chief State School Officers’ Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, 2020). Efforts continue to group dispositions and link them to educational theories to better understand their importance (Altan, Lane, & Dottin, 2019). The School of Education will assess dispositions in five areas: learning environment, collaboration, creative and critical thinking, professionalism, and diversity.

1. Learning Environment

Doctoral students reflect upon the importance of the learning environment as a place to share experiences and learn from others with the realization of the varied nature of learning. Flexibility and responsiveness to others' learning processes and the ability to adapt to different learning styles are important indicators of the desired disposition for doctoral students. As scholars, students must also value and seek the engagement of other practitioners through professional organizations and learning communities. Relevant dispositions include the following:

Creating environments of respect and rapport
Establishing a culture of learning
Designing cohesive teaching and learning experiences
Managing procedures and spaces to create productive learning environments
Demonstrating flexibility and responsiveness in learning environments
Respecting the learning process

2. Collaboration

Accepting others' perspectives and constructively resolving conflicts are integral parts of collaboration. Doctoral students should have a collaborative disposition that involves all stakeholders in collectively integrating ideas for growth. Flexibility and openness when making decisions using data-driven solutions to problems is a critical disposition. Doctoral students know consideration for others' perspectives and ideas can improve best practices, thus will seek to understand those perspectives and facilitate decisions that show respect for colleagues, students, and other stakeholders. Relevant dispositions include the following:

Listening to and respecting the opinions of others
Building consensus among stakeholders
Implementing strategies for conflict resolution
Participating in local and professional communities

3. Creative and Critical Thinking

Doctoral students must seek continuous improvement through professional service and research opportunities. Examining their position within a learning community occurs through self-reflection and continuous engagement with others to share best practices and design a positive learning environment. Critically analyzing a problem by engaging with others leads to creative solutions. Relevant dispositions include the following:

Analyzing, prioritizing, and acting on decisions
Integrating the perspectives of others
Being flexible, open, and responsible in decision making
Using data for decision making
Creating solutions to challenging education problems

4. Professionalism

As professionals, doctoral students must be able to make responsible, ethical decisions and communicate those decisions while constantly self-reflecting to ensure the implementation of best practices. This comes through actively listening to the opinions and ideas of all in the community of learners before deciding upon a plan of action. Doctoral students also seek opportunities to engage in activities to improve understanding of both self and others. Relevant dispositions include the following:

Fostering positive work and learning environments
Making ethical decisions
Communicating effectively
Engaging in self-reflection
Participating in service opportunities and/or professional development for improvement
Using current research and best practices

5. Diversity

Doctoral students realize that powerful communities are built on diversity and strive to create a sense of community building upon respect for the beliefs and contributions of all members. Actions can be implemented and conflicts resolved when there is a professional consensus and this will develop a stronger academic community. Relevant dispositions include the following:

Understanding the perspectives of others
Integrating inclusive practices
Using multiple strategies and modifications for learners and stakeholders
Interacting respectively with colleagues, students, and stakeholders

Altan, Lane, & Dottin. (2019). Using habits of mind, intelligent behaviors, and educational theories to create a conceptual framework for developing effective teaching dispositions. Journal of Teacher Education, 70 (2), 169-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487117736024

Council of Chief State School Officers’ Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (2020 July). InTASC model core teaching standards and learning progressions for teachers 1.0 . https://ccsso.org/sites/default/files/2017-12/2013_INTASC_Learning_Progressions_for_Teachers.pdf

Rokicki, S. (2018). Dispositional transference in teacher preparation candidates . (Publication No. 107788192). ProQuest Dissertation and Theses Global.

The Danielson Group. (2013). The framework for teaching . https://danielsongroup.org/framework/framework-teaching

Dispositions are an evaluative area for professional educators. At the conclusion of the student’s SoE degree program, the NU School of Education assesses dispositions in five areas: learning environment, collaboration, creative and critical thinking, professionalism, and diversity.

For your oral defense PowerPoint, create a Program Reflections slide per the instructions in the Oral Defense Presentation template. The preceding information in this document will help you prepare the reflections slide.

List the three areas you will discuss as bullet points on the slide. Then reflect on your NU experience and use the slide as a guide to briefly discuss how your doctoral experience has contributed to the development of your skills and abilities in any three of the five areas listed below.

Select THREE of the following professional dispositions for reflection.

[ ] Flexible, productive, respectful learning environment

[ ] Collaboration including listening, respect, consensus, and implementation in local or professional communities

[ ] Creative, flexible, open, critical thinking , resulting in analyzing, prioritizing and creating solutions

[ ] Professionalism that fosters self-reflection, communication, professional development or service, and current research and best practice making ethical decisions

[ ] Diversity in others’ perspectives, inclusive practices, respectful interaction, and strategies and modifications for learners

<< Previous: Publishing in ProQuest
Last Updated: Jul 27, 2023 1:40 PM
URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013609

All Courses
Registration Information
Academic Catalog
Faculty Login
Saved Courses

Course Search

Crit 602 (07) - advanced critical analysis and strategic thinking, advanced critical analysis, times & locations.

Start Date	End Date	Days	Time	Location
8/26/2024	10/18/2024		Hours Arranged	ONLINE

Book	Details
by SEE CANVAS

Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning

Teaching in 10 Words

From award-winning ou faculty.

Expressing your teaching philosophy in 10 words can be a short but powerful way to reflect on your teaching values and practices. We asked the recipients of Oakland University’s 2022 Teaching Awards to share their Teaching in 10 Words, plus a little more on those 10 words. Learn more about the awards , which are coordinated through the Senate Committee on Teaching and Learning .

The art of asking questions: teaching science as a dialogue

Taras Oleksyk, Teaching Excellence Award

My background as an immigrant deeply influences my teaching approach, which centers on "the art of asking questions." I view learning as discipline analogous to learning a language; first comes vocabulary, then sentences, and finally dialogue. My class revolves around the scientific method aiming to separate objective reality from subjective bias. To stimulate critical thinking, I require students to participate in online Q&A forums. These platforms serve as collaborative spaces where questions fuel intellectual discussions. Answering all these questions myself is time-consuming, but it is also my way of deepening my own understanding. Indeed, nothing has taught me more about my subject than answering questions from my students. While the Q&A method has ancient roots, tracing back to the Greeks, I believe it remains the most effective way to encourage active participation and cultivate a classroom culture that celebrates diversity of thought and values each student's contributions.

Students can do hard things: building critical thinking through scaffolding

Holly Greiner-Hallman, Excellence in Teaching Award

Most of us want our students to go beyond the memorization of rote facts and into the realm of analyzing and evaluating ideas using critical thinking. Whether I am teaching Biology I or the senior capstone course, my students are expected to demonstrate scientific thinking and problem-solving skills. To push them beyond “flashcard-style” studying, I employ scaffolding: a step-wise process that moves students toward greater independence in learning. My particular brand of scaffolding involves three main components: 1.) clarity and transparency, 2.) opportunities for productive risk and failure, and 3.) modeling. When students are offered this bridge, they become less resistant to more challenging forms of thinking because it reduces anxiety, mentally prepares them for challenging concepts, and creates a warm classroom environment.

Aiming to understand why

Helena Riha, Online Teaching Excellence Award

I am originally from Slovakia, having lived there until the age of 8 and then in Oklahoma until 18, including study in France at 17. After that, I lived in Taipei and Beijing for many years and in several areas of the U.S. for college and graduate school. I became interested in the languages, people, and cultures of these places and wanted to figure out why they had the quirky characteristics I observed, including similarities and differences among them. I now teach in two disciplines, linguistics and international studies, and cover a variety of courses. I continue to pursue the understanding of why. I focus students’ attention on what and how, certainly, but we do not stop there. We probe deeper to struggle with why. Why often proves to be the most vexing question, one that takes an open mind and knowledge of the subject area to begin to comprehend.

Save and adapt a Google Doc version of this teaching tip.

Others may share and adapt under Creative Commons License CC BY-NC . View all CETL Weekly Teaching Tips .

Most Popular
Discussion & Debate
Saved Stories
Arts & Culture
Business & Economics
Environment
Health & Medicine
Politics & Society
Sciences & Technology

School of Education

Library item label woz ere --> undergraduate undergraduate study courses foundation courses open days how to apply fees and funding your career student profiles postgraduate postgraduate study courses teacher training doctoral study open days how to apply fees and funding your career student profiles teacher training teacher training (pgce) courses open days how to apply fees and funding early career teacher support student profiles lifelong learning degrees with a foundation year courses certhe in combined studies with a foundation year programme structure events and open days how to apply eligibility and entry requirements fees and funding student profiles sheffield methods institute sheffield methods institute (smi) undergraduate study postgraduate study doctoral study research q-step research research education research sheffield methods institute research doctoral study the sheffield edd our doctoral students fees and funding school our school about us news events and conferences contact us support our people academic and research staff professional services staff current doctoral students.

Research students in the School of Education undertake research that encompasses critical thinking and the evaluation of contemporary issues that affect communities in local, national and global contexts. Their interests are broad and interdisciplinary.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Development of Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students in Education

2020, International Journal of Higher Education

Critical thinking in university studies is the cornerstone for the development of research processes at the doctoral level; it becomes the vector of this action, whose processes in the management of learning will require that the competencies understood are developed by teachers and students, for the achievement of the goals proposed by the actors involved. This is how the research had the purpose of measuring the critical thinking of university doctorate students whose methodology was quantitative, with a population of 150 students, which allowed, in the first place, to establish the reliability and the analysis of the construct of the instrument used (Watson-Glaser test) and whose results showed a reliability of 0.77, KMO of 0.757 with a bilateral significance of 0.000. Likewise, of the five dimensions or factors of the instrument, five have a positive impact on moderate levels (Nagelkerke's pseudo-R square of 0.574) excluding inference. The descriptive analysis established th...

Related Papers

YASALDEZ EDER LOAIZA ZULUAGA

Education and Self Development

Petr Kovarik

Critical thinking is necessary not only to understand the academic content, but also to effectively carry out activities related to one’s own profession. The aim of the research was to identify the level of critical thinking in university students and to determine the influence of selected variables on the level of critical thinking. The variables were gender, age, use of the media, necessity of the media, up-to-date information, up-to-date professional information, and health information on the Internet. Fifty respondents studying at university participated in the research. Both bachelor’s and master’s students at the age of 21 to 36 were involved in the study. In order to achieve the set goal, an quantitative approach was adopted using a critical thinking test (Criticatl Thinking Test for university Students - CTTUS) as a research technique. Descriptive, inductive and multivariate statistics were applied for the data analysis. Age and gender emerged as important factors. Informati...

Hakan Gülveren

Journal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment

Lifescience Global Canada

Objective: The paper examined for the first time the features of the formation of systemic critical thinking of students of a higher educational institution, using systemic methods specially developed for this. Background: Unfortunately, there is practically no specific technology or even a method that specifically solves the problem of forming critical thinking. Nevertheless, each person who did not even receive the skills of critical thinking in the learning process possesses this type of thinking to some extent. Method: The method of systemic structuring and studying information about the objects in question solves important tasks of developing ways of thinking that are very relevant for future specialists. Implementing the methods of systemic cognition of the studied objects and the surrounding reality ensured the development of the systematic knowledge, skills, and systemic and other relevant ways of thinking and a systematic approach in cognitive and other activities. Results: The peculiarity of what has been said is that students in the process of implementing this method learn and develop simultaneously the proposed types of activities (actions) and the corresponding ways of thinking, including critical ones, determined by them. The particularly important result of the implementation of a systematic approach and systematic methods developed on its basis is the formation of systematic-critical thinking. Conclusion: The concept of systematic-critical thinking has been developed. Using a systematic approach as a scientific method allowed to significantly transform not only theory and practice but also existing traditional technologies of the formation of critical thinking.

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

Aleksandra Gojkov-Rajić

Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences

Tanja R. Vec

Yıldız Ulusoy

Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research

Manuel Poblete

In our globalised, pluralistic, and often information-swamped society, critical thinking is recognised as an important competence to be developed in university education. In order to investigate this, 142 Latin American and Spanish teachers were asked about the importance of and potential for developing critical thinking in university education. Their responses were subjected to an inductive analysis, which lead to 13 categories about the reasons why it is important, and 11 categories about the potential and limitations for developing it in university education. These categories were found to remain statistically unchanged regardless of age, years of teaching experience, area of knowledge, gender and geographical area. Results show that teachers consider important to teach critical thinking at university and mainly for students to become good professionals in a complex world. Teachers believe it is possible to teach it, as long as active methodologies are used, in addition to other ...

Frontiers in Psychology

Majid Farahian

Success in adult life and effective functioning in education depends among other things on critical thinking. The present study consisted of two parts. First, critical thinking (CT) skill of a group of 68 students majoring in education in Islamic Azad University, Kermanshah Branch was evaluated. The participants, divided into two experimental and control groups, received California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) which is a 34 item Multiple-Choice test. The students in the control group were freshmen and the experimental group, junior students. To the researchers’ dismay, junior education students did not perform significantly better than did the freshman students. Using a qualitative method of research, another study was conducted to see whether the university instructors in the education department who had the responsibility of teaching different courses to the same students were aware of the principles of CT. A semi-structured interview was conducted and eight volunteering faculty members in the department of education took part in the interview. Result revealed that, although these instructors highly valued CT and were aware of its tenets, there were some constraints which did provide a situation to let the students practice CT in their classrooms, and much had to be done to help instructors implement CT in their classrooms.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Tuning Journal for Higher Education

Donna Fernández

Journal of european education

Helle Mathiasen

Jurnal Penelitian Humaniora

Slameto slameto

Critical Thinking Experienced by Students: a pehnomenological approach

Fredy H . Prieto G.

Procedia-Social and …

A. Seda Saracaloğlu

Süleyman Arslantaş , AHMET KURNAZ

CHAKREE KERDSOMBOON

International journal of modern education studies

AHMET KURNAZ

Procedia-Social and Behavioral …

farzaneh saadati

IJSRP Journal

Journal of Educational Studies and Multidisciplinary Approaches (JESMA)

Marco Ferreira

International Journal of Higher Education

Rajani James

Minerva Chavez

Journal of Education Culture and Society

Natalija Valavičienė

Please enter your credentials

Student Advisor Administrator Admissions Quiz Editor Link Exchange

keep me logged-in

Student Publications

Critical Thinking

Enhancing analytical skills: an executive summary of the critical thinking course.

The course on critical thinking emphasizes its essential role in education and everyday life. It covers key components, complex thinking, and practical applications, including tools like the Six Thinking Hats. By enhancing analytical and problem-solving skills, individuals can make informed decisions and navigate challenges effectively across various contexts.

106174405-1570711107124gettyimages-1083841638

Digital Signal Processing through algorithms and techniques for filtering, analysis, and transformation

Design and analysis of control systems

Publication:

The “Critical Thinking” course at Atlantic International University equips students with essential analytical and problem-solving skills vital for personal and professional success. It explores the foundations of critical thinking, emphasizing the importance of evaluating information objectively and considering multiple perspectives. Key frameworks, such as the Six Thinking Hats method, are introduced to enhance creative problem-solving abilities. The course also examines the application of critical thinking in various business contexts, including marketing strategies and product development, enabling students to make informed decisions in dynamic environments. By fostering a culture of critical thinking, students are prepared to tackle complex challenges, innovate solutions, and thrive in competitive landscapes, ultimately contributing to their growth and effectiveness in diverse settings.

Atlantic International University

Get to know the aiu experience, contact us today.

We understand how busy adults do not have time to go back to school. Now, it’s possible to earn your degree in the comfort of your own home and still have time for yourself and your family. The Admissions office is here to help you, for additional information or to see if you qualify for admissions please contact us. If you are ready to apply please submit your Online Application and paste your resume and any additional comments/questions in the area provided.

Pioneer Plaza 900 Fort Street Mall 905 Honolulu, HI 96813

800-993-0066 (Toll Free in US) 808-924-9567 (Internationally) 808-947-2488 (Fax)

AIU Success Stories

Albert Einstein

Mahatma Gandhi

Everything we know about Elon Musk's brain chip

Cicero Roman

Begin Your Journey! AIU’s Summer of Innovation and Growth gives you the ability to earn up to $5000 in tuition credit by completing free lessons and courses. Whether you’re looking to acquire new skills, advance your career, or simply explore new interests, AIU is your gateway to a world of opportunities. With free access to 3400 lessons and hundreds of courses the ability to earn credits and earn certificates there’s no better time to start learning. Join us today as a Guest Student and take the first step towards a brighter, more empowered future. Explore. Learn. Achieve.

Contact Us Atlantic International University

Quick links.

Open access
Published: 26 August 2024

Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of international medical students’ and ESP instructors’ perspectives through qualitative research

Elham Nasiri ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-0644-1646 1 &
Laleh Khojasteh ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6393-2759 1

BMC Medical Education volume 24 , Article number: 925 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

65 Accesses

Metrics details

This study investigates the effectiveness of panel discussions, a specific interactive teaching technique where a group of students leads a pre-planned, topic-focused discussion with audience participation, in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses for international medical students. This approach aims to simulate professional conference discussions, preparing students for future academic and clinical environments where such skills are crucial. While traditional group presentations foster critical thinking and communication, a gap exists in understanding how medical students perceive the complexities of preparing for and participating in panel discussions within an ESP setting. This qualitative study investigates the perceived advantages and disadvantages of these discussions from the perspectives of both panelists (medical students) and the audience (peers). Additionally, the study explores potential improvements based on insights from ESP instructors. Utilizing a two-phase design involving reflection papers and focus group discussions, data were collected from 46 medical students and three ESP instructors. Thematic analysis revealed that panel discussions offer unique benefits compared to traditional presentations, including enhanced engagement and more dynamic skill development for both panelists and the audience. Panelists reported gains in personal and professional development, including honing critical thinking, communication, and presentation skills. The audience perceived these discussions as engaging learning experiences that fostered critical analysis and information synthesis. However, challenges such as academic workload and concerns about discussion quality were also identified. The study concludes that panel discussions, when implemented effectively, can be a valuable tool for enhancing critical thinking, communication skills, and subject matter knowledge in ESP courses for medical students. These skills are transferable and can benefit students in various academic and professional settings, including future participation in medical conferences. This research provides valuable insights for ESP instructors seeking to integrate panel discussions into their curriculum, ultimately improving student learning outcomes and preparing them for future success in professional communication.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

In the field of medical education, the acquisition and application of effective communication skills are crucial for medical students in today’s global healthcare environment [ 1 ]. This necessitates not only strong English language proficiency but also the ability to present complex medical information clearly and concisely to diverse audiences.

Language courses, especially English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses for medical students, are highly relevant in today’s globalized healthcare environment [ 2 ]. In non-English speaking countries like Iran, these courses are particularly important as they go beyond mere language instruction to include the development of critical thinking, cultural competence, and professional communication skills [ 3 ]. Proficiency in English is crucial for accessing up-to-date research, participating in international conferences, and communicating with patients and colleagues from diverse backgrounds [ 4 ]. Additionally, ESP courses help medical students understand and use medical terminologies accurately, which is essential for reading technical articles, listening to audio presentations, and giving spoken presentations [ 5 ]. In countries where English is not the primary language, ESP courses ensure that medical professionals can stay current with global advancements and collaborate effectively on an international scale [ 6 ]. Furthermore, these courses support students who may seek to practice medicine abroad, enhancing their career opportunities and professional growth [ 7 ].

Moreover, ESP courses enable medical professionals to communicate effectively with international patients, which is crucial in multicultural societies and for medical tourism, ensuring that patient care is not compromised due to language barriers [ 8 ]. Many medical textbooks, journals, and online resources are available primarily in English, and ESP courses equip medical students with the necessary language skills to access and comprehend these resources, ensuring they are well-informed about the latest medical research and practices [ 9 ].

Additionally, many medical professionals from non-English speaking countries aim to take international certification exams, such as the USMLE or PLAB, which are conducted in English, and ESP courses prepare students for these exams by familiarizing them with the medical terminology and language used in these assessments [ 10 ]. ESP courses also contribute to the professional development of medical students by improving their ability to write research papers, case reports, and other academic documents in English, which is essential for publishing in international journals and contributing to global medical knowledge [ 11 ]. In the increasingly interdisciplinary field of healthcare, collaboration with professionals from other countries is common, and ESP courses facilitate effective communication and collaboration with international colleagues, fostering innovation and the exchange of ideas [ 12 ].

With the rise of telemedicine and online medical consultations, proficiency in English is essential for non-English speaking medical professionals to provide remote healthcare services to international patients, and ESP courses prepare students for these modern medical practices [ 13 ].

Finally, ESP courses often include training on cultural competence, which is crucial for understanding and respecting the cultural backgrounds of patients and colleagues, leading to more empathetic and effective patient care and professional interactions [ 14 ]. Many ESP programs for medical students incorporate group presentations as a vital component of their curriculum, recognizing the positive impact on developing these essential skills [ 15 ].

Group projects in language courses, particularly in ESP for medical students, are highly relevant for several reasons. They provide a collaborative environment that mimics real-world professional settings, where healthcare professionals often work in multidisciplinary teams [ 16 ]. These group activities foster not only language skills but also crucial soft skills such as teamwork, leadership, and interpersonal communication, which are essential in medical practice [ 17 ].

The benefits of group projects over individual projects in language learning are significant. Hartono, Mujiyanto [ 18 ] found that group presentation tasks in ESP courses led to higher self-efficacy development compared to individual tasks. Group projects encourage peer learning, where students can learn from each other’s strengths and compensate for individual weaknesses [ 19 ]. They also provide a supportive environment that can reduce anxiety and increase willingness to communicate in the target language [ 20 ]. However, it is important to note that group projects also come with challenges, such as social loafing and unequal contribution, which need to be managed effectively [ 21 ].

Traditional lecture-based teaching methods, while valuable for knowledge acquisition, may not effectively prepare medical students for the interactive and collaborative nature of real-world healthcare settings [ 22 ]. Panel discussions (hereafter PDs), an interactive teaching technique where a group of students leads a pre-planned, topic-focused discussion with audience participation, are particularly relevant in this context. They simulate professional conference discussions and interdisciplinary team meetings, preparing students for future academic and clinical environments where such skills are crucial [ 23 ].

PDs, also known as moderated discussions or moderated panels, are a specific type of interactive format where a group of experts or stakeholders engage in a facilitated conversation on a particular topic or issue [ 22 ]. In this format, a moderator guides the discussion, encourages active participation from all panelists, and fosters a collaborative environment that promotes constructive dialogue and critical thinking [ 24 ]. The goal is to encourage audience engagement and participation, which can be achieved through various strategies such as asking open-ended questions, encouraging counterpoints and counterarguments, and providing opportunities for audience members to pose questions or share their own experiences [ 25 ]. These discussions can take place in-person or online, and can be designed to accommodate diverse audiences and settings [ 26 ].

In this study, PD is considered a speaking activity where medical students are assigned specific roles to play during the simulation, such as a physician, quality improvement specialist, policymaker, or patient advocate. By taking on these roles, students can gain a better understanding of the diverse perspectives and considerations that come into play in real-world healthcare discussions [ 23 ]. Simulating PDs within ESP courses can be a powerful tool for enhancing medical students’ learning outcomes in multiple areas. This approach improves language proficiency, academic skills, and critical thinking abilities, while also enabling students to communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders in the medical field [ 27 , 28 ].

Theoretical framework

The panel discussions in our study are grounded in the concept of authentic assessment (outlined by Villarroel, Bloxham [ 29 ]), which involves designing tasks that mirror real-life situations and problems. In the context of medical education, this approach is particularly relevant as it prepares students for the complex, multidisciplinary nature of healthcare communication. Realism can be achieved through two means: providing a realistic context that describes and delivers a frame for the problem to be solved and creating tasks that are similar to those faced in real and/or professional life [ 30 ]. In our study, the PDs provide a realistic context by simulating scenarios where medical students are required to discuss and present complex medical topics in a professional setting, mirroring the types of interactions they will encounter in their future careers.

The task of participating in PDs also involves cognitive challenge, as students are required to think critically about complex medical topics, analyze information, and communicate their findings effectively. This type of task aims to generate processes of problem-solving, application of knowledge, and decision-making that correspond to the development of cognitive and metacognitive skills [ 23 ]. For medical students, these skills are crucial in developing clinical reasoning and effective patient communication. The PDs encourage students to go beyond the textual reproduction of fragmented and low-order content and move towards understanding, establishing relationships between new ideas and previous knowledge, linking theoretical concepts with everyday experience, deriving conclusions from the analysis of data, and examining both the logic of the arguments present in the theory and its practical scope [ 24 , 25 , 27 ].

Furthermore, the evaluative judgment aspect of our study is critical in helping students develop criteria and standards about what a good performance means in medical communication. This involves students judging their own performance and regulating their own learning [ 31 ]. In the context of panel discussions, students reflect on their own work, compare it with desired standards, and seek feedback from peers and instructors. By doing so, students can develop a sense of what constitutes good performance in medical communication and what areas need improvement [ 32 ]. Boud, Lawson and Thompson [ 33 ] argue that students need to build a precise judgment about the quality of their work and calibrate these judgments in the light of evidence. This skill is particularly important for future medical professionals who will need to continually assess and improve their communication skills throughout their careers.

The theoretical framework presented above highlights the importance of authentic learning experiences in medical education. By drawing on the benefits of group work and panel discussions, university instructor-researchers aimed to provide medical students with a unique opportunity to engage with complex cases and develop their communication and collaboration skills. As noted by Suryanarayana [ 34 ], authentic learning experiences can lead to deeper learning and improved retention. Considering the advantages of group work in promoting collaborative problem-solving and language development, the instructor-researchers designed a panel discussion task that simulates real-world scenarios, where students can work together to analyze complex cases, share knowledge, and present their findings to a simulated audience.

While previous studies have highlighted the benefits of interactive learning experiences and critical thinking skills in medical education, a research gap remains in understanding how medical students perceive the relevance of PDs in ESP courses. This study aims to address this gap by investigating medical students’ perceptions of PD tasks in ESP courses and how these perceptions relate to their language proficiency, critical thinking skills, and ability to communicate effectively with diverse stakeholders in the medical field. This understanding can inform best practices in medical education, contributing to the development of more effective communication skills for future healthcare professionals worldwide [ 23 ]. The research questions guiding this study are:

What are the perceived advantages of PDs from the perspectives of panelists and the audience?

What are the perceived disadvantages of PDs from the perspectives of panelists and the audience?

How can PDs be improved for panelists and the audience based on the insights of ESP instructors?

Methodology

Aim and design.

For this study, a two-phase qualitative design was employed to gain an understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of PDs from the perspectives of both student panelists and the audience (Phase 1) and to acquire an in-depth understanding of the suggested strategies provided by experts to enhance PPs for future students (Phase 2).

Participants and context of the study

This study was conducted in two phases (Fig. 1 ) at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Shiraz, Iran.

Participants of the study in two phases

In the first phase, the student participants were 46 non-native speakers of English and international students who studied medicine at SUMS. Their demographic characteristics can be seen in Table 1 .

These students were purposefully selected because they were the only SUMS international students who had taken the ESP (English for Specific Purposes) course. The number of international students attending SUMS is indeed limited. Each year, a different batch of international students joins the university. They progress through a sequence of English courses, starting with General English 1 and 2, followed by the ESP course, and concluding with academic writing. At the time of data collection, the students included in the study were the only international students enrolled in the ESP course. This mandatory 3-unit course is designed to enhance their language and communication skills specifically tailored to their profession. As a part of the Medicine major curriculum, this course aims to improve their English language proficiency in areas relevant to medicine, such as understanding medical terminology, comprehending original medicine texts, discussing clinical cases, and communicating with patients, colleagues, and other healthcare professionals.

Throughout the course, students engage in various interactive activities, such as group discussions, role-playing exercises, and case studies, to develop their practical communication skills. In this course, medical students receive four marks out of 20 for their oral presentations, while the remaining marks are allocated to their written midterm and final exams. From the beginning of the course, they are briefed about PDs, and they are shown two YouTube-downloaded videos about PDs at medical conferences, a popular format for discussing and sharing knowledge, research findings, and expert opinions on various medical topics.

For the second phase of the study, a specific group of participants was purposefully selected. This group consisted of three faculty members from SUMS English department who had extensive experience attending numerous conferences at national and international levels, particularly in the medical field, as well as working as translators and interpreters in medical congresses. Over the course of ten years, they also gained considerable experience in PDs. They were invited to discuss strategies helpful for medical students with PDs.

Panel discussion activity design and implementation

When preparing for a PD session, medical students received comprehensive guidance on understanding the roles and responsibilities of each panel member. This guidance was aimed at ensuring that each participant was well-prepared and understood their specific role in the discussion.

Moderators should play a crucial role in steering the conversation. They are responsible for ensuring that all panelists have an opportunity to contribute and that the audience is engaged effectively. Specific tasks include preparing opening remarks, introducing panelists, and crafting transition questions to facilitate smooth topic transitions. The moderators should also manage the time to ensure balanced participation and encourage active audience involvement.

Panelists are expected to be subject matter experts who bring valuable insights and opinions to the discussion. They are advised to conduct thorough research on the topic and prepare concise talking points. Panelists are encouraged to draw from their medical knowledge and relevant experiences, share evidence-based information, and engage with other panelists’ points through active listening and thoughtful responses.

The audience plays an active role in the PDs. They are encouraged to participate by asking questions, sharing relevant experiences, and contributing to the dialogue. To facilitate this, students are advised to take notes during the discussion and think of questions or comments they can contribute during the Q&A segment.

For this special course, medical students were advised to choose topics either from their ESP textbook or consider current medical trends, emerging research, and pressing issues in their field. Examples included breast cancer, COVID-19, and controversies in gene therapy. The selection process involved brainstorming sessions and consultation with the course instructor to ensure relevance and appropriateness.

To accommodate the PD sessions within the course structure, students were allowed to start their PD sessions voluntarily from the second week. However, to maintain a balance between peer-led discussions and regular course content, only one PD was held weekly. This approach enabled the ESP lecturer to deliver comprehensive content while also allowing students to engage in these interactive sessions.

A basic time structure was suggested for each PD (Fig. 2 ):

Time allocation for panel discussion stages in minutes

To ensure the smooth running of the course and maintain momentum, students were informed that they could cancel their PD session only once. In such cases, they were required to notify the lecturer and other students via the class Telegram channel to facilitate rescheduling and minimize disruptions. This provision was essential in promoting a sense of community among students and maintaining the course’s continuity.

Research tools and data collection

The study utilized various tools to gather and analyze data from participants and experts, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the research topic.

Reflection papers

In Phase 1 of the study, 46 medical students detailed their perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of panel discussions from dual perspectives: as panelists (presenters) and as audience members (peers).

Participants were given clear instructions and a 45-minute time frame to complete the reflection task. With approximately 80% of the international language students being native English speakers and the rest fluent in English, the researchers deemed this time allocation reasonable. The questions and instructions were straightforward, facilitating quick comprehension. It was estimated that native English speakers would need about 30 min to complete the task, while non-native speakers might require an extra 15 min for clarity and expression. This time frame aimed to allow students to respond thoughtfully without feeling rushed. Additionally, students could request more time if needed.

Focus group discussion

In phase 2 of the study, a focus group discussion was conducted with three expert participants. The purpose of the focus group was to gather insights from expert participants, specifically ESP (English for Specific Purposes) instructors, on how presentation dynamics can be improved for both panelists and the audience.

According to Colton and Covert [ 35 ], focus groups are useful for obtaining detailed input from experts. The appropriate size of a focus group is determined by the study’s scope and available resources [ 36 ]. Morgan [ 37 ] suggests that small focus groups are suitable for complex topics where specialist participants might feel frustrated if not allowed to express themselves fully.

The choice of a focus group over individual interviews was based on several factors. First, the exploratory nature of the study made focus groups ideal for interactive discussions, generating new ideas and in-depth insights [ 36 ]. Second, while focus groups usually involve larger groups, they can effectively accommodate a limited number of experts with extensive knowledge [ 37 ]. Third, the focus group format fostered a more open environment for idea exchange, allowing participants to engage dynamically [ 36 ]. Lastly, conducting a focus group was more time- and resource-efficient than scheduling three separate interviews [ 36 ].

Data analysis

The first phase of the study involved a thorough examination of the data related to the research inquiries using thematic analysis. This method was chosen for its effectiveness in uncovering latent patterns from a bottom-up perspective, facilitating a comprehensive understanding of complex educational phenomena [ 38 ]. The researchers first familiarized themselves with the data by repeatedly reviewing the reflection papers written by the medical students. Next, an initial round of coding was independently conducted to identify significant data segments and generate preliminary codes that reflected the students’ perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of presentation dynamics PDs from both the presenter and audience viewpoints [ 38 ].

The analysis of the reflection papers began with the two researchers coding a subset of five papers independently, adhering to a structured qualitative coding protocol [ 39 ]. They convened afterward to compare their initial codes and address any discrepancies. Through discussion, they reached an agreement on the codes, which were then analyzed, organized into categories and themes, and the frequency of each code was recorded [ 38 ].

After coding the initial five papers, the researchers continued to code the remaining 41 reflection paper transcripts in batches of ten, meeting after each batch to review their coding, resolve any inconsistencies, and refine the coding framework as needed. This iterative process, characterized by independent coding, joint reviews, and consensus-building, helped the researchers establish a robust and reliable coding approach consistently applied to the complete dataset [ 40 ]. Once all 46 reflection paper transcripts were coded, the researchers conducted a final review and discussion to ensure accurate analysis. They extracted relevant excerpts corresponding to the identified themes and sub-themes from the transcripts to provide detailed explanations and support for their findings [ 38 ]. This multi-step approach of separate initial coding, collaborative review, and frequency analysis enhanced the credibility and transparency of the qualitative data analysis.

To ensure the trustworthiness of the data collected in this study, the researchers adhered to the Guba and Lincoln standards of scientific accuracy in qualitative research, which encompass credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability [ 41 ] (Table 2 ).

The analysis of the focus group data obtained from experts followed the same rigorous procedure applied to the student participants’ data. Thematic analysis was employed to examine the experts’ perspectives, maintaining consistency in the analytical approach across both phases of the study. The researchers familiarized themselves with the focus group transcript, conducted independent preliminary coding, and then collaboratively refined the codes. These codes were subsequently organized into categories and themes, with the frequency of each code recorded. The researchers engaged in thorough discussions to ensure agreement on the final themes and sub-themes. Relevant excerpts from the focus group transcript were extracted to provide rich, detailed explanations of each theme, thereby ensuring a comprehensive and accurate analysis of the experts’ insights.

1. What are the advantages of PDs from the perspective of panelists and the audience?

The analysis of the advantages of PDs from the perspectives of both panelists and audience members revealed several key themes and categories. Tables 2 and 3 present the frequency and percentage of responses for each code within these categories.

From the panelists’ perspective (Table 3 ), the overarching theme was “Personal and Professional Development.” The most frequently reported advantage was knowledge sharing (93.5%), followed closely by increased confidence (91.3%) and the importance of interaction in presentations (91.3%).

Notably, all categories within this theme had at least one code mentioned by over 80% of participants, indicating a broad range of perceived benefits. The category of “Effective teamwork and communication” was particularly prominent, with collaboration (89.1%) and knowledge sharing (93.5%) being among the most frequently cited advantages. This suggests that PDs are perceived as valuable tools for fostering interpersonal skills and collective learning. In the “Language mastery” category, increased confidence (91.3%) and better retention of key concepts (87.0%) were highlighted, indicating that PDs are seen as effective for both language and content learning.

The audience perspective (Table 4 ), encapsulated under the theme “Enriching Learning Experience,” showed similarly high frequencies across all categories.

The most frequently mentioned advantage was exposure to diverse speakers (93.5%), closely followed by the range of topics covered (91.3%) and increased audience interest (91.3%). The “Broadening perspectives” category was particularly rich, with all codes mentioned by over 70% of participants. This suggests that audience members perceive PDs as valuable opportunities for expanding their knowledge and viewpoints. In the “Language practice” category, the opportunity to practice language skills (89.1%) was the most frequently cited advantage, indicating that even as audience members, students perceive significant language learning benefits.

Comparing the two perspectives reveals several interesting patterns:

High overall engagement: Both panelists and audience members reported high frequencies across all categories, suggesting that PDs are perceived as beneficial regardless of the role played.

Language benefits: While panelists emphasized increased confidence (91.3%) and better retention of concepts (87.0%), audience members highlighted opportunities for language practice (89.1%). This indicates that PDs offer complementary language learning benefits for both roles.

Interactive learning: The importance of interaction was highly rated by panelists (91.3%), while increased audience interest was similarly valued by the audience (91.3%). This suggests that PDs are perceived as an engaging, interactive learning method from both perspectives.

Professional development: Panelists uniquely emphasized professional growth aspects such as experiential learning (84.8%) and real-world application (80.4%). These were not directly mirrored in the audience perspective, suggesting that active participation in PDs may offer additional professional development benefits.

Broadening horizons: Both groups highly valued the diversity aspect of PDs. Panelists appreciated diversity and open-mindedness (80.4%), while audience members valued diverse speakers (93.5%) and a range of topics (91.3%).

2. What are the disadvantages of PDs from the perspective of panelists and the audience?

The analysis of the disadvantages of panel discussions (PDs) from the perspectives of both panelists and audience members revealed several key themes and categories. Tables 4 and 5 present the frequency and percentage of responses for each code within these categories.

From the panelists’ perspective (Table 5 ), the theme “Drawbacks of PDs” was divided into two main categories: “Academic Workload Challenges” and “Coordination Challenges.” The most frequently reported disadvantage was long preparation (87.0%), followed by significant practice needed (82.6%) and the time-consuming nature of PDs (80.4%). These findings suggest that the primary concern for panelists is the additional workload that PDs impose on their already demanding academic schedules. The “Coordination Challenges” category, while less prominent than workload issues, still presented significant concerns. Diverse panel skills (78.3%) and finding suitable panelists (73.9%) were the most frequently cited issues in this category, indicating that team dynamics and composition are notable challenges for panelists.

The audience perspective (Table 6 ), encapsulated under the theme “Drawbacks of PDs,” was divided into two main categories: “Time-related Issues” and “Interaction and Engagement Issues.” In the “Time-related Issues” category, the most frequently mentioned disadvantage was the inefficient use of time (65.2%), followed by the perception of PDs as too long and boring (60.9%). Notably, 56.5% of respondents found PDs stressful due to overwhelming workload from other studies, and 52.2% considered them not very useful during exam time. The “Interaction and Engagement Issues” category revealed more diverse concerns. The most frequently mentioned disadvantage was the repetitive format (82.6%), followed by limited engagement with the audience (78.3%) and the perception of PDs as boring (73.9%). The audience also noted issues related to the panelists’ preparation and coordination, such as “Not practiced and natural” (67.4%) and “Coordination and Interaction Issues” (71.7%), suggesting that the challenges faced by panelists directly impact the audience’s experience.

Workload concerns: Both panelists and audience members highlighted time-related issues. For panelists, this manifested as long preparation times (87.0%) and difficulty balancing with other studies (76.1%). For the audience, it appeared as perceptions of inefficient use of time (65.2%) and stress due to overwhelming workload from other studies (56.5%).

Engagement issues: While panelists focused on preparation and coordination challenges, the audience emphasized the quality of the discussion and engagement. This suggests a potential mismatch between the efforts of panelists and the expectations of the audience.

Boredom and repetition: The audience frequently mentioned boredom (73.9%) and repetitive format (82.6%) as issues, which weren’t directly mirrored in the panelists’ responses. This indicates that while panelists may be focused on content preparation, the audience is more concerned with the delivery and variety of the presentation format.

Coordination challenges: Both groups noted coordination issues, but from different perspectives. Panelists struggled with team dynamics and finding suitable co-presenters, while the audience observed these challenges manifesting as unnatural or unpracticed presentations.

Academic pressure: Both groups acknowledged the strain PDs put on their academic lives, with panelists viewing it as a burden (65.2%) and the audience finding it less useful during exam times (52.2%).

3. How can PDs be improved for panelists and the audience from the experts’ point of view?

The presentation of data for this research question differs from the previous two due to the unique nature of the information gathered. Unlike the quantifiable student responses in earlier questions, this data stems from expert opinions and a reflection discussion session, focusing on qualitative recommendations for improvement rather than frequency of responses (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The complexity and interconnectedness of expert suggestions, coupled with the integration of supporting literature, necessitate a more narrative approach (Creswell & Poth, 2018). This format allows for a richer exploration of the context behind each recommendation and its potential implications (Patton, 2015). Furthermore, the exploratory nature of this question, aimed at generating ideas for improvement rather than measuring prevalence of opinions, is better served by a detailed, descriptive presentation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This approach enables a more nuanced understanding of how PDs can be enhanced, aligning closely with the “how” nature of the research question and providing valuable insights for potential implementation (Yin, 2018).

The experts provided several suggestions to address the challenges faced by students in panel discussions (PDs) and improve the experience for both panelists and the audience. Their recommendations focused on six key areas: time management and workload, preparation and skill development, engagement and interactivity, technological integration, collaboration and communication, and institutional support.

To address the issue of time management and heavy workload, one expert suggested teaching students to “ break down the task to tackle the time-consuming nature of panel discussions and balance it with other studies .” This approach aims to help students manage the extensive preparation time required for PDs without compromising their other academic responsibilities. Another expert emphasized “ enhancing medical students’ abilities to prioritize tasks , allocate resources efficiently , and optimize their workflow to achieve their goals effectively .” These skills were seen as crucial not only for PD preparation but also for overall academic success and future professional practice.

Recognizing the challenges of long preparation times and the perception of PDs being burdensome, an expert proposed “ the implementation of interactive training sessions for panelists .” These sessions were suggested to enhance coordination skills and improve the ability of group presenters to engage with the audience effectively. The expert emphasized that such training could help students view PDs as valuable learning experiences rather than additional burdens, potentially increasing their motivation and engagement in the process.

To combat issues of limited engagement and perceived boredom, experts recommended increasing engagement opportunities for the audience through interactive elements like audience participation and group discussions. They suggested that this could transform PDs from passive listening experiences to active learning opportunities. One expert suggested “ optimizing time management and restructuring the format of panel discussions ” to address inefficiency during sessions. This restructuring could involve shorter presentation segments interspersed with interactive elements to maintain audience attention and engagement.

An innovative solution proposed by one expert was “ using ChatGPT to prepare for PDs by streamlining scenario presentation preparation and role allocation. ” The experts collectively discussed the potential of AI to assist medical students in reducing their workload and saving time in preparing scenario presentations and allocating roles in panel discussions. They noted that AI could help generate initial content drafts, suggest role distributions based on individual strengths, and even provide practice questions for panelists, significantly reducing preparation time while maintaining quality.

Two experts emphasized the importance of enhancing collaboration and communication among panelists to address issues related to diverse panel skills and coordination challenges. They suggested establishing clear communication channels and guidelines to improve coordination and ensure a cohesive presentation. This could involve creating structured team roles, setting clear expectations for each panelist, and implementing regular check-ins during the preparation process to ensure all team members are aligned and progressing.

All experts were in agreement that improving PDs would not be possible “ if nothing is done by the university administration to reduce the ESP class size for international students .” They believed that large class sizes in ESP or EFL classes could negatively influence group oral presentations, hindering language development and leading to uneven participation. The experts suggested that smaller class sizes would allow for more individualized attention, increased speaking opportunities for each student, and more effective feedback mechanisms, all of which are crucial for developing strong presentation skills in a second language.

Research question 1: what are the advantages of PDs from the perspective of panelists and the audience?

The results of this study reveal significant advantages of PDs for both panelists and audience members in the context of medical education. These findings align with and expand upon previous research in the field of educational presentations and language learning.

Personal and professional development for panelists

The high frequency of reported benefits in the “Personal and Professional Development” theme for panelists aligns with several previous studies. The emphasis on language mastery, particularly increased confidence (91.3%) and better retention of key concepts (87.0%), supports the findings of Hartono, Mujiyanto [ 42 ], Gedamu and Gezahegn [ 15 ], Li [ 43 ], who all highlighted the importance of language practice in English oral presentations. However, our results show a more comprehensive range of benefits, including professional growth aspects like experiential learning (84.8%) and real-world application (80.4%), which were not as prominently featured in these earlier studies.

Interestingly, our findings partially contrast with Chou [ 44 ] study, which found that while group oral presentations had the greatest influence on improving students’ speaking ability, individual presentations led to more frequent use of metacognitive, retrieval, and rehearsal strategies. Our results suggest that PDs, despite being group activities, still provide significant benefits in these areas, possibly due to the collaborative nature of preparation and the individual responsibility each panelist bears. The high frequency of knowledge sharing (93.5%) and collaboration (89.1%) in our study supports Harris, Jones and Huffman [ 45 ] emphasis on the importance of group dynamics and varied perspectives in educational settings. However, our study provides more quantitative evidence for these benefits in the specific context of PDs.

Enriching learning experience for the audience

The audience perspective in our study reveals a rich learning experience, with high frequencies across all categories. This aligns with Agustina [ 46 ] findings in business English classes, where presentations led to improvements in all four language skills. However, our study extends these findings by demonstrating that even passive participation as an audience member can lead to significant perceived benefits in language practice (89.1%) and broadening perspectives (93.5% for diverse speakers). The high value placed on diverse speakers (93.5%) and range of topics (91.3%) by the audience supports the notion of PDs as a tool for expanding knowledge and viewpoints. This aligns with the concept of situated learning experiences leading to deeper understanding in EFL classes, as suggested by Li [ 43 ] and others [ 18 , 31 ]. However, our study provides more specific evidence for how this occurs in the context of PDs.

Interactive learning and engagement

Both panelists and audience members in our study highly valued the interactive aspects of PDs, with the importance of interaction rated at 91.3% by panelists and increased audience interest at 91.3% by the audience. This strong emphasis on interactivity aligns with Azizi and Farid Khafaga [ 19 ] study on the benefits of dynamic assessment and dialogic learning contexts. However, our study provides more detailed insights into how this interactivity is perceived and valued by both presenters and audience members in PDs.

Professional growth and real-world application

The emphasis on professional growth through PDs, particularly for panelists, supports Li’s [ 43 ] assertion about the power of oral presentations as situated learning experiences. Our findings provide more specific evidence for how PDs contribute to professional development, with high frequencies reported for experiential learning (84.8%) and real-world application (80.4%). This suggests that PDs may be particularly effective in bridging the gap between academic learning and professional practice in medical education.

Research question 2: what are the disadvantages of pds from the perspective of panelists and the audience?

Academic workload challenges for panelists.

The high frequency of reported challenges in the “Academic Workload Challenges” category for panelists aligns with several previous studies in medical education [ 47 , 48 , 49 ]. The emphasis on long preparation (87.0%), significant practice needed (82.6%), and the time-consuming nature of PDs (80.4%) supports the findings of Johnson et al. [ 24 ], who noted that while learners appreciate debate-style journal clubs in health professional education, they require additional time commitment. This is further corroborated by Nowak, Speed and Vuk [ 50 ], who found that intensive learning activities in medical education, while beneficial, can be time-consuming for students.

Perceived value of pds relative to time investment

While a significant portion of the audience (65.2%) perceived PDs as an inefficient use of time, the high frequency of engagement-related concerns (82.6% for repetitive format, 78.3% for limited engagement) suggests that the perceived lack of value may be more closely tied to the quality of the experience rather than just the time investment. This aligns with Dyhrberg O’Neill [ 27 ] findings on debate-based oral exams, where students perceived value despite the time-intensive nature of the activity. However, our results indicate a more pronounced concern about the return on time investment in PDs. This discrepancy might be addressed through innovative approaches to PD design and implementation, such as those proposed by Almazyad et al. [ 22 ], who suggested using AI tools to enhance expert panel discussions and potentially improve efficiency.

Coordination challenges for panelists

The challenges related to coordination in medical education, such as diverse panel skills (78.3%) and finding suitable panelists (73.9%), align with previous research on teamwork in higher education [ 21 ]. Our findings support the concept of the free-rider effect discussed by Hall and Buzwell [ 21 ], who explored reasons for non-contribution in group projects beyond social loafing. This is further elaborated by Mehmood, Memon and Ali [ 51 ], who proposed that individuals may not contribute their fair share due to various factors including poor communication skills or language barriers, which is particularly relevant in medical education where clear communication is crucial [ 52 ]. Comparing our results to other collaborative learning contexts in medical education, Rodríguez-Sedano, Conde and Fernández-Llamas [ 53 ] measured teamwork competence development in a multidisciplinary project-based learning environment. They found that while teamwork skills improved over time, initial coordination challenges were significant. This aligns with our findings on the difficulties of coordinating diverse panel skills and opinions in medical education settings.

Our results also resonate with Chou’s [ 44 ] study comparing group and individual oral presentations, which found that group presenters often had a limited understanding of the overall content. This is supported by Wilson, Ho and Brookes [ 54 ], who examined student perceptions of teamwork in undergraduate science degrees, highlighting the challenges and benefits of collaborative work, which are equally applicable in medical education [ 52 ].

Quality of discussions and perception for the audience

The audience perspective in our study reveals significant concerns about the quality and engagement of PDs in medical education. The high frequency of issues such as repetitive format (82.6%) and limited engagement with the audience (78.3%) aligns with Parmar and Bickmore [ 55 ] findings on the importance of addressing individual audience members and gathering feedback. This is further supported by Nurakhir et al. [ 25 ], who explored students’ views on classroom debates as a strategy to enhance critical thinking and oral communication skills in nursing education, which shares similarities with medical education. Comparing our results to other interactive learning methods in medical education, Jones et al. [ 26 ] reviewed the use of journal clubs and book clubs in pharmacy education. They found that while these methods enhanced engagement, they also faced challenges in maintaining student interest over time, similar to the boredom issues reported in our study of PDs in medical education. The perception of PDs as boring (73.9%) and not very useful during exam time (52.2%) supports previous research on the stress and pressure experienced by medical students [ 48 , 49 ]. Grieve et al. [ 20 ] specifically examined student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education, which provides context for the anxiety and disengagement observed in our study of medical education. Interestingly, Bhuvaneshwari et al. [ 23 ] found positive impacts of panel discussions in educating medical students on specific modules. This contrasts with our findings and suggests that the effectiveness of PDs in medical education may vary depending on the specific context and implementation.

Comparative analysis and future directions

Our study provides a unique comparative analysis of the challenges faced by both panelists and audience members in medical education. The alignment of concerns around workload and time management between the two groups suggests that these are overarching issues in the implementation of PDs in medical curricula. This is consistent with the findings of Pasandín et al. [ 56 ], who examined cooperative oral presentations in higher education and their impact on both technical and soft skills, which are crucial in medical education [ 52 ]. The mismatch between panelist efforts and audience expectations revealed in our study is a novel finding that warrants further investigation in medical education. This disparity could be related to the self-efficacy beliefs of presenters, as explored by Gedamu and Gezahegn [ 15 ] in their study of TEFL trainees’ attitudes towards academic oral presentations, which may have parallels in medical education. Looking forward, innovative approaches could address some of the challenges identified in medical education. Almazyad et al. [ 22 ] proposed using AI tools like ChatGPT to enhance expert panel discussions in pediatric palliative care, which could potentially address some of the preparation and engagement issues identified in our study of medical education. Additionally, Ragupathi and Lee [ 57 ] discussed the role of rubrics in higher education, which could provide clearer expectations and feedback for both panelists and audience members in PDs within medical education.

Research question 3: how can PDs be improved for panelists and the audience from the experts’ point of view?

The expert suggestions for improving PDs address several key challenges identified in previous research on academic presentations and student workload management. These recommendations align with current trends in educational technology and pedagogical approaches, while also considering the unique needs of medical students.

The emphasis on time management and workload reduction strategies echoes findings from previous studies on medical student stress and academic performance. Nowak, Speed and Vuk [ 50 ] found that medical students often struggle with the fast-paced nature of their courses, which can lead to reduced motivation and superficial learning approaches. The experts’ suggestions for task breakdown and prioritization align with Rabbi and Islam [ 58 ] recommendations for reducing workload stress through effective assignment prioritization. Additionally, Popa et al. [ 59 ] highlight the importance of acceptance and planning in stress management for medical students, supporting the experts’ focus on these areas.

The proposed implementation of interactive training sessions for panelists addresses the need for enhanced presentation skills in professional contexts, a concern highlighted by several researchers [ 17 , 60 ]. This aligns with Grieve et al. [ 20 ] findings on student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education, emphasizing the need for targeted training. The focus on interactive elements and audience engagement also reflects current trends in active learning pedagogies, as demonstrated by Pasandín et al. [ 56 ] in their study on cooperative oral presentations in engineering education.

The innovative suggestion to use AI tools like ChatGPT for PD preparation represents a novel approach to leveraging technology in education. This aligns with recent research on the potential of AI in scientific research, such as the study by Almazyad et al. [ 22 ], which highlighted the benefits of AI in supporting various educational tasks. However, it is important to consider potential ethical implications and ensure that AI use complements rather than replaces critical thinking and creativity.

The experts’ emphasis on enhancing collaboration and communication among panelists addresses issues identified in previous research on teamwork in higher education. Rodríguez-Sedano, Conde and Fernández-Llamas [ 53 ] noted the importance of measuring teamwork competence development in project-based learning environments. The suggested strategies for improving coordination align with best practices in collaborative learning, as demonstrated by Romero-Yesa et al. [ 61 ] in their qualitative assessment of challenge-based learning and teamwork in electronics programs.

The unanimous agreement on the need to reduce ESP class sizes for international students reflects ongoing concerns about the impact of large classes on language learning and student engagement. This aligns with research by Li [ 3 ] on issues in developing EFL learners’ oral English communication skills. Bosco et al. [ 62 ] further highlight the challenges of teaching and learning ESP in mixed classes, supporting the experts’ recommendation for smaller class sizes. Qiao, Xu and bin Ahmad [ 63 ] also emphasize the implementation challenges for ESP formative assessment in large classes, further justifying the need for reduced class sizes.

These expert recommendations provide a comprehensive approach to improving PDs, addressing not only the immediate challenges of preparation and delivery but also broader issues of student engagement, workload management, and institutional support. By implementing these suggestions, universities could potentially transform PDs from perceived burdens into valuable learning experiences that enhance both academic and professional skills. This aligns with Kho and Ting [ 64 ] systematic review on overcoming oral presentation anxiety among tertiary ESL/EFL students, which emphasizes the importance of addressing both challenges and strategies in improving presentation skills.

This study has shed light on the complex challenges associated with PDs in medical education, revealing a nuanced interplay between the experiences of panelists and audience members. The findings underscore the need for a holistic approach to implementing PDs that addresses both the academic workload concerns and the quality of engagement.

Our findings both support and extend previous research on the challenges of oral presentations and group work in medical education settings. The high frequencies of perceived challenges across multiple categories for both panelists and audience members suggest that while PDs may offer benefits, they also present significant obstacles that need to be addressed in medical education. These results highlight the need for careful consideration in the implementation of PDs in medical education, with particular attention to workload management, coordination strategies, and audience engagement techniques. Future research could focus on developing and testing interventions to mitigate these challenges while preserving the potential benefits of PDs in medical education.

Moving forward, medical educators should consider innovative approaches to mitigate these challenges. This may include:

Integrating time management and stress coping strategies into the PD preparation process [ 59 ].

Exploring the use of AI tools to streamline preparation and enhance engagement [ 22 ].

Developing clear rubrics and expectations for both panelists and audience members [ 57 ].

Incorporating interactive elements to maintain audience interest and participation [ 25 ].

Limitations and future research

One limitation of this study is that it focused on a specific population of medical students, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other student populations. Additionally, the study relied on self-report data from panelists and audience members, which may introduce bias and affect the validity of the results. Future research could explore the effectiveness of PDs in different educational contexts and student populations to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the benefits and challenges of panel discussions.

Future research should focus on evaluating the effectiveness of these interventions and exploring how PDs can be tailored to the unique demands of medical education. By addressing the identified challenges, PDs have the potential to become a more valuable and engaging component of medical curricula, fostering both academic and professional development. Ultimately, the goal should be to transform PDs from perceived burdens into opportunities for meaningful learning and skill development, aligning with the evolving needs of medical education in the 21st century.

Future research could also examine the long-term impact of PDs on panelists’ language skills, teamwork, and communication abilities. Additionally, exploring the effectiveness of different training methods and tools, such as AI technology, in improving coordination skills and reducing workload stress for panelists could provide valuable insights for educators and administrators. Further research could also investigate the role of class size and audience engagement in enhancing the overall effectiveness of PDs in higher education settings. By addressing these gaps in the literature, future research can contribute to the ongoing development and improvement of PDs as a valuable learning tool for students in higher education.

However, it is important to note that implementing these changes may require significant institutional resources and a shift in pedagogical approaches. Future research could focus on piloting these recommendations and evaluating their effectiveness in improving student outcomes and experiences with PDs.

Data availability

We confirm that the data supporting the findings are available within this article. Raw data supporting this study’s findings are available from the corresponding author, upon request.

Abbreviations

Artificial Intelligence

English as a Foreign Language

English for Specific Purposes

Panel Discussion

Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

Harden RM, Laidlaw JM. Essential skills for a medical teacher: an introduction to teaching and learning in medicine. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2020.

Ibrahim Mohamed O, Al Jadaan DO. English for Specific purposes (Esp) Needs Analysis for Health Sciences students: a cross-sectional study at a University in the UAE. English for Specific purposes (Esp) Needs Analysis for Health Sciences Students: A Cross-Sectional Study at a University in the UAE.

Li Y, Heron M. English for general academic purposes or English for specific purposes? Language learning needs of medical students at a Chinese university. Theory Pract Lang Stud. 2021;11(6):621–31.

Article Google Scholar

Chan SMH, Mamat NH, Nadarajah VD. Mind your language: the importance of English language skills in an International Medical Programme (IMP). BMC Med Educ. 2022;22(1):405.

Cortez Faustino BS, Ticas de Córdova CK, de la Hernández DI. Teaching English for specific purposes: contents and methodologies that could be implemented in the English for Medical purposes (EMP) course for the doctor of Medicine Major at the University of El Salvador. Universidad de El Salvador; 2022.

BENYAMINA E-Z BOUKAHLAH. Enhancing Specialty Language learning through content-based instruction: students of Paramedical Institute of Tiaret as a case study. Université IBN KHALDOUN-Tiaret; 2023.

Prikazchikov M. Medical English course for russian-speaking dentists: a needs analysis study. Iowa State University; 2024.

Kim C, Lee SY, Park S-H. Is Korea Ready to be a key player in the Medical Tourism Industry? An English Education Perspective. Iran J Public Health. 2020;49(2):267–73.

Google Scholar

Syakur A, Zainuddin H, Hasan MA. Needs analysis English for specific purposes (esp) for vocational pharmacy students. Budapest International Research and Critics in Linguistics and Education (BirLE). Journal. 2020;3(2):724–33.

Chan S, Taylor L. Comparing writing proficiency assessments used in professional medical registration: a methodology to inform policy and practice. Assess Writ. 2020;46:100493.

Hyland K, Jiang FK. Delivering relevance: the emergence of ESP as a discipline. Engl Specif Purp. 2021;64:13–25.

Maftuna B. The role of English in ESP. Am J Adv Sci Res. 2024;1(2):1–5.

LEON LI, HUMANIZING THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE. COURSE: NEW TEACHING METHODS FOR MEDICAL STUDENTS. Language, Culture and Change. 2022:243.

Dahm MR, Yates L. Rapport, empathy and professional identity: Some challenges for international medical graduates speaking English as a second or foreign language. Multilingual Healthcare: A Global View on Communicative Challenges. 2020:209 – 34.

Gedamu AD, Gezahegn TH. TEFL trainees’ attitude to and self-efficacy beliefs of academic oral presentation. Cogent Educ. 2023;10(1):2163087.

Saliu B, Hajrullai H. Best practices in the English for specific purpose classes at the language center. Procedia-Social Behav Sci. 2016;232:745–9.

Clokie TL, Fourie E. Graduate employability and communication competence: are undergraduates taught relevant skills? Bus Prof Communication Q. 2016;79(4):442–63.

Hartono H, Mujiyanto J, Fitriati SW, Sakhiyya Z, Lotfie MM, Maharani MM. English Presentation Self-Efficacy Development of Indonesian ESP students: the effects of Individual versus Group Presentation tasks. Int J Lang Educ. 2023;7(3):361–76.

Azizi Z, Farid Khafaga A. Scaffolding via Group-dynamic Assessment to positively affect motivation, learning anxiety, and willingness to Communicate: a Case Study of High School Students. J Psycholinguist Res. 2023;52(3):831–51.

Grieve R, Woodley J, Hunt SE, McKay A. Student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education: a qualitative survey. J Furth High Educ. 2021;45(9):1281–93.

Hall D, Buzwell S. The problem of free-riding in group projects: looking beyond social loafing as reason for non-contribution. Act Learn High Educ. 2013;14(1):37–49.

Almazyad M, Aljofan F, Abouammoh NA, Muaygil R, Malki KH, Aljamaan F, et al. Enhancing Expert Panel discussions in Pediatric Palliative Care: innovative scenario development and summarization with ChatGPT-4. Cureus. 2023;15(4):e38249.

Bhuvaneshwari S, Rashmi R, Deepika K, Anirudh VM, Vijayamathy A, Rekha S, Kathiravan R. Impact of panel discussion in educating AETCOM First Module among Undergraduate Medical Students. Latin Am J Pharmacy: Life Sci J. 2023;42(6):407–12.

Johnson BR, Logan LD, Darley A, Stone RH, Smith SE, Osae SP, et al. A scoping review for Debate-Style Journal Clubs in Health Professional Education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2023;87(6):100064.

Nurakhir A, Palupi FN, Langeveld C, Nurmalia D. Students’ views of classroom debates as a strategy to enhance critical thinking and oral communication skills. 2020.

Jones EP, Nelson NR, Thorpe CT, Rodgers PT, Carlson RB. Use of journal clubs and book clubs in pharmacy education: a scoping review. Currents Pharm Teach Learn. 2022;14(1):110–9.

Dyhrberg O’Neill L. Assessment of student debates in support of active learning? Students’ perceptions of a debate-based oral final exam. Act Learn High Educ. 2024.

Dyment JE, O’Connell TS. Assessing the quality of reflection in student journals: a review of the research. Teach High Educ. 2011;16(1):81–97.

Villarroel V, Bloxham S, Bruna D, Bruna C, Herrera-Seda C. Authentic assessment: creating a blueprint for course design. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2018;43(5):840–54.

Schultz M, Young K, Gunning K, Harvey T. Defining and measuring authentic assessment: a case study in the context of tertiary science. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2022;47(1):77–94.

Sundrarajun C, Kiely R. The oral presentation as a context for learning and assessment. Innov Lang Learn Teach. 2010;4(2):101–17.

Wyatt-Smith C, Adie L. The development of students’ evaluative expertise: enabling conditions for integrating criteria into pedagogic practice. J Curriculum Stud. 2021;53(4):399–419.

Boud D, Lawson R, Thompson DG. The calibration of student judgement through self-assessment: disruptive effects of assessment patterns. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(1):45–59.

A. S. Enhancing Meaningful Learning experiences through Comprehension and Retention by students. Twentyfirst Century Publications Patiala. 2023;49.

Colton D, Covert RW. Designing and constructing instruments for social research and evaluation. Wiley; 2007.

Krueger RA, Casey MA. Focus group interviewing. Handbook of practical program evaluation. 2015:506 – 34.

Morgan DL. Handbook of interview research: Context and method. Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications Thousand; 2002.

Braun V, Clarke V. Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychol. 2022;9(1):3.

Elliott V. Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Rep. 2018;23(11).

Syed M, Nelson SC. Guidelines for establishing reliability when coding narrative data. Emerg Adulthood. 2015;3(6):375–87.

Lincoln Y. Naturalistic inquiry: Sage; 1985.

Hartono H, Mujiyanto J, Fitriati SW, Sakhiyya Z, Lotfie MM, Maharani MM. English presentation self-efficacy development of Indonesian ESP students: the effects of Individual versus Group Presentation tasks. Int J Lang Educ. 2023;7(3).

Li X. Teaching English oral presentations as a situated task in an EFL classroom: a quasi-experimental study of the effect of video-assisted self-reflection. Revista Signos. 2018;51(98):359–81.

Chou M-h. The influence of learner strategies on oral presentations: a comparison between group and individual performance. Engl Specif Purp. 2011;30(4):272–85.

Harris A, Jones M, Huffman J. Teachers leading educational reform. The power of. 2017.

Agustina L. Stimulating students to speak up through presentation in business English class. J Appl Stud Lang. 2019;3(1):21–8.

Babal JC, Abraham O, Webber S, Watterson T, Moua P, Chen J. Student pharmacist perspectives on factors that influence wellbeing during pharmacy school. Am J Pharm Educ. 2020;84(9):ajpe7831.

Moir F, Yielder J, Sanson J, Chen Y. Depression in medical students: current insights. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2018;323:33.

Pavlinac Dodig I, Lusic Kalcina L, Demirovic S, Pecotic R, Valic M, Dogas Z. Sleep and lifestyle habits of medical and non-medical students during the COVID-19 lockdown. Behav Sci. 2023;13(5):407.

Nowak G, Speed O, Vuk J. Microlearning activities improve student comprehension of difficult concepts and performance in a biochemistry course. Currents Pharm Teach Learn. 2023;15(1):69–78.

Mehmood K, Memon S, Ali F. Language barriers to Effective Communication in speaking English: a phenomenological study of Pakistan International cricketers. Pakistan Lang Humanit Rev. 2024;8(1):107–14.

Buelow JR, Downs D, Jorgensen K, Karges JR, Nelson D. Building interdisciplinary teamwork among allied health students through live clinical case simulations. J Allied Health. 2008;37(2):e109–23.

Rodríguez-Sedano FJ, Conde M, Fernández-Llamas C, editors. Measuring teamwork competence development in a multidisciplinary project based learning environment. Learning and Collaboration Technologies Design, Development and Technological Innovation: 5th International Conference, LCT 2018, Held as Part of HCI International 2018, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 15–20, 2018, Proceedings, Part I 5; 2018: Springer.

Wilson L, Ho S, Brookes RH. Student perceptions of teamwork within assessment tasks in undergraduate science degrees. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2018;43(5):786–99.

Parmar D, Bickmore T. Making it personal: addressing individual audience members in oral presentations using augmented reality. Proc ACM Interact Mob Wearable Ubiquitous Technol. 2020;4(2):1–22.

Pasandín AMR, Pérez IP, Iglesias PO, Díaz JJG. Cooperative oral presentations in higher education to enhance technical and soft skills in engineering students. Int J Continuing Eng Educ Life Long Learn. 2023;33(6):592–607.

Ragupathi K, Lee A. Beyond fairness and consistency in grading: The role of rubrics in higher education. Diversity and inclusion in global higher education: Lessons from across Asia. 2020:73–95.

Rabbi MF, Islam MS. The effect of academic stress and Mental anxiety among the students of Khulna University. Edukasiana: Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan. 2024;3(3):280–99.

Popa CO, Schenk A, Rus A, Szasz S, Suciu N, Szabo DA, Cojocaru C. The role of acceptance and planning in stress management for medical students. Acta Marisiensis-Seria Med. 2020;66(3):101–5.

Christianson M, Payne S. Helping students develop skills for better presentations: Using the 20x20 format for presentation training. 語学研究. 2012;26:1–15.

Romero-Yesa S, Fonseca D, Aláez M, Amo-Filva D. Qualitative assessment of a challenge-based learning and teamwork applied in electronics program. Heliyon. 2023;9(12).

Bosco TJ, Gabriel B, Florence M, Gilbert N. Towards effective teaching and learning ESP in mixed classes: students’ interest, challenges and remedies. Int J Engl Literature Social Sci. 2020;5(2):506–16.

Qiao L, Xu Y, bin Ahmad N, An Analysis Of Implementation Challenges For English, For Specific Purposes (Esp) Formative Assessment Via Blended Learning Mode At Chinese Vocational Polytechnics. Journal Of Digital Education, Communication, And Arts (DECA). 2023;6(02):64–76.

Kho MG-W, Ting S-H. Overcoming oral presentation anxiety: a systematic review of Tertiary ESL/EFL Students’ challenges and strategies. Qeios. 2023.

Download references

We confirm that no funding was received for this work.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of English Language, School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Elham Nasiri & Laleh Khojasteh

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

L.KH was involved in writing the proposal, reviewing the text, analyzing the data, and writing the manuscript. E. N was involvedin designing the research and collecting and analyzing the data. Both authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laleh Khojasteh .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Our study, entitled “Evaluating Panel Discussions in ESP Classes: An Exploration of International Medical Students’ and ESP Instructors’ Perspectives through Qualitative Research,” was reviewed by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the School of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS). The IRB reviewed the study on August 14th, 2024, and determined that formal ethics approval or a reference number was not required. This decision was based on the fact that the research posed minimal risk to participants and focused solely on their educational experiences without involving any intervention or the collection of sensitive personal data.

Consent for publication

Not Applicable.

Competing interests

We confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and that this work did not receive any financial support.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Nasiri, E., Khojasteh, L. Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of international medical students’ and ESP instructors’ perspectives through qualitative research. BMC Med Educ 24 , 925 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05911-3

Download citation

Received : 08 May 2024

Accepted : 14 August 2024

Published : 26 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05911-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Group oral presentations
Medical students
Panel discussions
ESP courses

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

General enquiries: [email protected]

A Better Tomorrow

Discover caring financial guidance and expert insights to help you achieve your financial goals for an even better tomorrow

Entrepreneurship Games for Students: Engage & Educate Innovators

August 29, 2024

In today's education world, helping students develop entrepreneurial skills is essential. These skills prepare students for the tricky parts of the modern economy. Entrepreneurship games are a fun way to learn that mix creativity, critical thinking, and hands-on experience.

Did you know that approximately 60% of Indiana residents have participated in entrepreneurship? [1] If the next generation is better educated, more Hoosier entrepreneurs are sure to be successful.

This guide will look at different games designed to get young people excited about entrepreneurship and teach them the basics.

How To Engage Students in Entrepreneurship

Educators play a crucial role in shaping the entrepreneurial mindset of their students. To create a dynamic and engaging learning environment, consider incorporating activities and challenges. Use games that bring abstract business concepts to life.

Encourage students to explore different aspects of entrepreneurship, such as marketing, finance, and innovation, through hands-on activities. Foster a collaborative classroom culture where students can share ideas, learn from one another, and nurture their creativity.

By providing opportunities for active engagement and exploration, you'll help your students develop the skills and confidence they need to thrive.

You might also like: 10 Best Resources for Small Business Owners to Learn & Grow

What Are Entrepreneurship Activities?

Entrepreneurship activities are like real-world simulations for entrepreneurs. They're carefully designed to help you think critically and see challenges like a business leader.

These activities teach you to:

Spot opportunities.
Make tough choices.

Bounce back from both wins and losses.

They're not just games — they're immersive experiences that give you skills to use in any career, whether you start your own business or work for someone else.

You might also like: Small Business vs. Micro Business: Differences Explained

How Entrepreneurship Games for Students Work to Teach Problem-solving Skills

Entrepreneurship games are structured activities that simulate real-world business challenges in an educational setting. Students engage in hands-on exercises where they make decisions, solve problems, and manage resources — mirroring the experiences of entrepreneurs.

These games foster critical thinking, creativity, and practical skills such as teamwork and decision-making. By providing a dynamic learning environment, entrepreneurship games prepare students to navigate complexities, innovate, and thrive in entrepreneurial or professional settings.

You might also like: Small Business Budget Example

4 Top Entrepreneurship Games to Engage & Teach Students / Children

There are countless entrepreneurial games that can be used for engaging and interactive learning experiences. The following games are designed to teach the basics of business while encouraging creativity and critical thinking. They provide immersive simulations of different aspects of business, from coming up with new ideas to dealing with challenges and making strategic decisions.

By playing these games, your students can experience the complexities of entrepreneurship. If you include these games in your lessons, students will gain valuable skills that will help them in their future careers.

You might also like: 10 Steps to Start Your Business

1. The Innovation Auction

The Innovation Auction game is designed to help students practice investing in business ideas with a virtual budget. Students will learn skills for presenting, evaluating, and investing in promising business ideas.

Instructions:

Assign each student a set budget (e.g., $100 play or virtual dollars).

Students present their business ideas in a structured format, such as an elevator pitch.

Conduct a silent auction where students bid on the ideas presented by their peers. Then students or student teams must invest a portion of their money into three or more business ideas, not including their own idea.

The business idea with the highest investment at the end of the auction wins the game.

This activity teaches students how to assess business opportunities, manage resources effectively, and make strategic investment decisions (think shark tank).

You might also like: List of Monthly Expenses for Small Business

2. The Pivot Challenge

The Pivot Challenge game encourages teams to adapt their business ideas based on feedback and changing market conditions. Teams will pivot and add to their original initial business concept significantly to better meet market demands or overcome obstacles.

Guide team sessions to brainstorm and develop a basic business concept.

Provide feedback from classmates or mentors to prompt teams to rethink their ideas.

Based on the feedback they receive, teams should make substantial changes to their target market, product features, or business model.

The Pivot Challenge helps to foster adaptability, creative problem-solving skills, and the ability to respond effectively to market changes.

You might also like: How Can I Fund My Business Without a Bank Loan?

3. The Marketing Challenge

The Marketing Challenge game focuses on developing and executing a comprehensive marketing strategy for a new product or service. Students will create and implement an effective marketing plan within given constraints, such as budget and/or timeframe.

Guide students in identifying target audiences and researching their preferences and needs.

Help students choose appropriate marketing channels (e.g., social media, print) and design promotional materials.

Students should implement their marketing plan to effectively communicate the product’s benefits to potential customers.

This game helps students understand the importance of market research, customer engagement, and clear communication strategies in business.

Recommended: Typical Marketing Budget for Small Business to Unlock Success

4. The Business Banking Simulation

The Business Banking Simulation game immerses students in real-world scenarios where they manage financial transactions and utilize banking products relevant to business. Students will learn to navigate and utilize essential business banking products and services effectively.

Divide students into teams representing virtual businesses (e.g., retail store, tech startup, consultancy).

Begin with a session where students learn about various business banking products:

– Business checking accounts . Explain the features and benefits, such as transaction limits, fees, and online banking capabilities.

– Commercial cards . Discuss how credit limits, rewards programs, and interest rates impact business finances.

– Business loans and lines of credit . Introduce different types of loans (e.g., term loans, SBA loans) and lines of credit available for business expansion and operational needs.

– Merchant services . Cover payment processing solutions, including POS systems, online payment gateways, and associated fees.

Provide teams with simulated business scenarios. This might include purchasing inventory, paying suppliers, or replacing broken equipment.

Teams must decide which banking products to use for each transaction based on cost-effectiveness, cash flow management, and financial planning. Require teams to create budgets and forecasts using real banking data and transaction history.

Assess teams based on their financial decisions, budget accuracy, and ability to effectively manage cash flow using the provided banking products.

Conclude with a debriefing session where teams reflect on their decisions, discuss challenges faced, and identify strategies for improving financial management in future simulations.

The Business Banking Simulation game enhances students' understanding of business banking, financial management, and decision-making in a simulated environment. It prepares them for real-world scenarios where effective use of banking services is crucial for business success.

You might also like: Best Practices to Establish Good Business Credit

Advance Your Entrepreneurial Journey with Centier

These entrepreneurship fun games are more than just play—they're powerful tools for learning and growth. By participating, you'll gain hands-on experience in business fundamentals, develop essential skills for future success, and ignite your entrepreneurial spirit. Whether you're a student exploring career options or an educator looking to inspire the next generation of innovators, these games are an excellent way to engage and educate.

Want to learn more about entrepreneurship and level up your business skills? Explore Centier’s small business tools and resources today .

Source:

Stay Connected

Download Our Mobile App

Routing Number: 071902878

Privacy | Terms of Use | Disclosures | Sitemap

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
BMC Med Educ
PMC10428545

Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design using problem-based learning

Michael d. schaller.

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center 64 Medical Center Drive, P.O. Box 9142, Morgantown, WV 26506 USA

Marieta Gencheva

Michael r. gunther, scott a. weed, associated data.

All data generated in this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

Traditionally, doctoral student education in the biomedical sciences relies on didactic coursework to build a foundation of scientific knowledge and an apprenticeship model of training in the laboratory of an established investigator. Recent recommendations for revision of graduate training include the utilization of graduate student competencies to assess progress and the introduction of novel curricula focused on development of skills, rather than accumulation of facts. Evidence demonstrates that active learning approaches are effective. Several facets of active learning are components of problem-based learning (PBL), which is a teaching modality where student learning is self-directed toward solving problems in a relevant context. These concepts were combined and incorporated in creating a new introductory graduate course designed to develop scientific skills (student competencies) in matriculating doctoral students using a PBL format.

Evaluation of course effectiveness was measured using the principals of the Kirkpatrick Four Level Model of Evaluation. At the end of each course offering, students completed evaluation surveys on the course and instructors to assess their perceptions of training effectiveness. Pre- and post-tests assessing students’ proficiency in experimental design were used to measure student learning.

The analysis of the outcomes of the course suggests the training is effective in improving experimental design. The course was well received by the students as measured by student evaluations (Kirkpatrick Model Level 1). Improved scores on post-tests indicate that the students learned from the experience (Kirkpatrick Model Level 2). A template is provided for the implementation of similar courses at other institutions.

Conclusions

This problem-based learning course appears effective in training newly matriculated graduate students in the required skills for designing experiments to test specific hypotheses, enhancing student preparation prior to initiation of their dissertation research.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-023-04569-7.

Introduction

For over a decade there have been calls to reform biomedical graduate education. There are two main problems that led to these recommendations and therefore two different prescriptions to solve these problems. The first major issue is the pursuit of non-traditional (non-academic) careers by doctorates and concerns of adequate training [ 1 , 2 ]. The underlying factors affecting career outcomes are the number of PhDs produced relative to the number of available academic positions [ 1 , 3 – 5 ], and the changing career interests of doctoral students [ 6 – 9 ]. One aspect in the proposed reformation to address this problem is incorporation of broader professional skills training and creating awareness of a greater diversity of careers into the graduate curriculum [ 1 , 4 , 5 ]. The second issue relates to the curricula content and whether content knowledge or critical scientific skills should be the core of the curriculum [ 10 , 11 ]. The proposed reformation to address this issue is creation of curricula focusing upon scientific skills, e.g. reasoning, experimental design and communication, while simultaneously reducing components of the curricula that build a foundational knowledge base [ 12 , 13 ]. Components of these two approaches are not mutually exclusive, where incorporation of select specialized expertise in each area has the potential to concurrently address both issues. Here we describe the development, implementation and evaluation of a new problem-based learning (PBL)-based graduate course that provides an initial experience in introducing the scientific career-relevant core competencies of critical thinking and experimental design to incoming biomedical doctoral students. The purpose of this course is to address these issues by creating a vehicle to develop professional skills (communication) and critical scientific skills (critical thinking and experimental design) for first year graduate students.

One approach that prioritizes the aggregate scientific skill set required for adept biomedical doctorates is the development of core competencies for doctoral students [ 5 , 14 , 15 ], akin to set milestones that must be met by medical residents and fellows [ 16 ]. Key features of these competencies include general and field-specific scientific knowledge, critical thinking, experimental design, evaluation of outcomes, scientific rigor, ability to work in teams, responsible conduct of research, and effective communication [ 5 , 14 , 15 ]. Such competencies provide clear benchmarks to evaluate the progress of doctoral students’ development into an independent scientific professional and preparedness for the next career stage. Historically, graduate programs relied on traditional content-based courses and supervised apprenticeship in the mentor’s laboratory to develop such competencies. An alternative to this approach is to modify the graduate student curriculum to provide a foundation for these competencies early in the curriculum in a more structured way. This would provide a base upon which additional coursework and supervised dissertation research could build to develop competencies in doctoral students.

Analyses of how doctoral students learn scientific skills suggest a threshold model, where different skillsets are mastered (a threshold reached), before subsequent skillsets can be mastered [ 17 , 18 ]. Skills like using the primary literature, experimental design and placing studies in context are earlier thresholds than identifying alternatives, limitations and data analysis [ 18 ]. Timmerman et al. recommend revision of graduate curricula to sequentially build toward these thresholds using evidence-based approaches [ 18 ]. Several recent curricular modifications are aligned with these recommendations. One program, as cited above, offers courses to develop critical scientific skills early in the curriculum with content knowledge provided in later courses [ 12 , 13 ]. A second program has built training in experimental design into the coursework in the first semester of the curriculum. Improvements in students experimental design skills and an increase in self-efficacy in experimental design occurred over the course of the semester [ 19 ]. Other programs have introduced exercises into courses and workshops to develop experimental design skills using active learning. One program developed interactive sessions on experimental design, where students give chalk talks about an experimental plan to address a problem related to course content and respond to challenges from their peers [ 20 ]. Another program has developed a workshop drawing upon principles from design thinking to build problem solving skills and creativity, and primarily uses active learning and experiential learning approaches [ 21 ]. While these programs are well received by students, the outcomes of training have not been reported. Similar undergraduate curricula that utilize literature review with an emphasis on scientific thought and methods report increased performance in critical thinking, scientific reasoning and experimental design [ 22 , 23 ].

It is notable that the changes these examples incorporate into the curriculum are accompanied with a shift from didactic teaching to active learning. Many studies have demonstrated that active learning is more effective than a conventional didactic curriculum in STEM education [ 24 ]. Problem-based learning (PBL) is one active learning platform that the relatively new graduate program at the Van Andel Institute Graduate School utilizes for delivery of the formal curriculum [ 25 ]. First developed for medical students [ 26 ], the PBL learning approach has been adopted in other educational settings, including K-12 and undergraduate education [ 27 , 28 ]. A basic tenet of PBL is that student learning is self-directed [ 26 ]. Students are tasked to solve an assigned problem and are required to find the information necessary for the solution (self-directed). In practice, learning occurs in small groups where a faculty facilitator helps guide the students in identifying gaps in knowledge that require additional study [ 29 ]. As such, an ideal PBL course is “well organized” but “poorly structured”. The lack of a traditional restrictive structure allows students to pursue and evaluate different solutions to the problem.

The premise for PBL is that actively engaging in problem solving enhances learning in several ways [ 29 , 30 ]. First, activation of prior knowledge, as occurs in group discussions, aids in learning by providing a framework to incorporate new knowledge. Second, deep processing of material while learning, e.g. by answering questions or using the knowledge, enhances the ability to later recall key concepts. Third, learning in context, e.g. learning the scientific basis for clinical problems in the context of clinical cases, enables and improves recall. These are all effective strategies to enhance learning [ 31 ]. PBL opponents argue that acquisition of knowledge is more effective in a traditional didactic curriculum. Further, development of critical thinking skills requires the requisite foundational knowledge to develop realistic solutions to problems [ 32 ].

A comprehensive review of PBL outcomes from K-12 through medical school indicated that PBL students perform better in the application of knowledge and reasoning, but not in other areas like basic knowledge [ 33 ]. Other recent meta-analyses support the conclusion that PBL, project-based learning and other small group teaching modalities are effective in education from primary school to university, including undergraduate courses in engineering and technology, and pharmacology courses for professional students in health sciences [ 34 – 39 ]. While the majority of the studies reported in these meta-analyses demonstrate that PBL results in better academic performance, there are contrasting studies that demonstrate that PBL is ineffective. This prompts additional investigation to determine the salient factors that distinguish the two outcomes to establish best practices for better results using the PBL platform. Although few studies report the outcomes of PBL based approaches in graduate education, this platform may be beneficial in training biomedical science doctoral students for developing and enhancing critical thinking and practical problem-solving skills.

At our institution, biomedical doctoral students enter an umbrella program and take a core curriculum in the first semester prior to matriculating into one of seven biomedical sciences doctoral programs across a wide range of scientific disciplines in the second semester. Such program diversity created difficulty in achieving consensus on the necessary scientific foundational knowledge for a core curriculum. Common ground was achieved during a recent curriculum revision through the development of required core competencies for all students, regardless of field of study. These competencies and milestones for biomedical science students at other institutions [ 5 , 14 , 15 ], along with nontraditional approaches to graduate education [ 12 , 25 ], were used as guidelines for curriculum modification.

Course design

A course was created to develop competencies required by all biomedical sciences doctoral students regardless of their program of interest [ 14 ]. As an introductory graduate level course, this met the needs of all our seven diverse biomedical sciences doctoral programs where our first-year doctoral students matriculate. A PBL platform was chosen for the course to engage the students in an active learning environment [ 25 ]. The process of problem solving in small teams provided the students with experience in establishing working relationships and how to operate in teams. The students gained experience in researching material from the literature to establish scientific background, find current and appropriate experimental approaches and examples of how results are analyzed. This small group approach allowed each team to develop different hypotheses, experimental plans and analyses based upon the overall interests of the group. The course was designed following discussions with faculty experienced in medical and pharmacy school PBL, and considering course design principles from the literature [ 27 , 40 ]. The broad learning goals are similar to the overall objectives in another doctoral program using PBL as the primary course format [ 25 ], and are aligned with recommended core competencies for PhD scientists [ 14 ]. These goals are to:

Develop broad, general scientific knowledge (core competency 1 [ 14 ]).
Develop familiarity with technical approaches specific to each problem.
including: formulation of hypotheses, detailed experimental design, interpretation of data, statistical analysis (core competencies 3 and 4 [ 14 ]).
Practice communication skills: written and verbal communication skills (core competency 8 [ 14 ]).
Develop collaboration and team skills (core competency 6 [ 14 ]).
Practice using the literature.

Students were organized into groups of four or five based on their scientific background. Student expertise in each group was deliberately mixed to provide different viewpoints during discussion. A single faculty facilitator was assigned to each student group, which met formally in 13 separate sessions (Appendix II). In preparation for each session, the students independently researched topics using the literature (related to goal 6) and met informally without facilitator oversight to coordinate their findings and organize the discussion for each class session. During the formal one-hour session, one student served as the group leader to manage the discussion. The faculty facilitator guided the discussion to ensure coverage of necessary topics and helped the students identify learning issues, i.e. areas that required additional development, for the students to research and address for the subsequent session. At the end of each session, teams previewed the leading questions for the following class and organized their approach to address these questions prior to the next session. The whole process provided experiences related to goal 5.

As the course was developed during the COVID-19 pandemic, topics related to SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19 were selected as currently relevant problems in society. Session 1 prepared the students to work in teams by discussing about how to work in teams and manage conflict (related to goal 5). In session 2, the students met in their assigned groups to get to know each other, discuss problem-based learning and establish ground rules for the group. Sessions 3 and 4 laid the course background by focusing on the SARS-CoV2 virus and COVID-19-associated pathologies (related to goal 1). The subsequent nine sessions were organized into three separate but interrelated three-session blocks: one on COVID-19 and blood clotting, one on COVID-19 and loss of taste, and one on SARS-CoV2 and therapeutics. The first session in each of these blocks was devoted to covering background information (blood clotting, neurosensation and drug application)(related to goal 1). The second session of each block discussed hypothesis development (mechanisms that SARS-CoV2 infection might utilize to alter blood clotting, the sense of taste, and identification of therapeutic targets to attenuate SARS-CoV2 infection)(related to goal 3). In the second sessions the students also began to design experiments to test the hypothesis. The final session of each block fleshed out the details of the experimental design (related to goals 2 and 3).

The process was iterative, where the students had three opportunities to discuss hypothesis development, experimental design and analysis during sessions with their facilitators. Written and oral presentation assignments (Appendix V) provided additional opportunities to articulate a hypothesis, describe experimental approaches to test the hypotheses, propose analysis of experimental results and develop communication skills (related to goal 4).

Rigor and reproducibility was incorporated into the course. This was an important component given the emphasis recently placed on rigor and reproducibility by federal agencies. As the students built the experimental design to address the hypothesis, recurring questions were posed to encourage them to consider rigor. Examples include: “ Are the methods and experimental approaches rigorous? How could they be made more rigorous? ” “ Discuss how your controls validate the outcome of the experiment. What additional controls could increase confidence in your result? ” The facilitators were instructed to direct discussion to topics related to the rigor of the experimental design. The students were asked about numbers of replicates, number of animals, additional methods that could be applied to support the experiment, and other measurements to address the hypothesis in a complementary fashion. In the second iteration of the course, we introduced an exercise on rigor and reproducibility for the students using the NIH Rigor and Reproducibility Training Modules (see Appendix III). In this exercise, the students read a short introduction to rigor and reproducibility and viewed a number of short video modules to introduce lessons on rigor. The students were also provided the link to the National Institute of General Medical Sciences clearinghouse of training modules on rigor and reproducibility as reference for experimental design in their future (see Appendix III).

The first delivery of the course was during the COVID-19 pandemic and sessions were conducted on the Zoom platform. The thirteen PBL sessions, and two additional sessions dedicated to oral presentations, were spaced over the course of the first semester of the biomedical sciences doctoral curriculum. The second iteration of the course followed the restructuring of the graduate first year curriculum and the thirteen PBL sessions, plus one additional session devoted to oral presentations, were held during the first three and a half weeks of the first-year curriculum. During this period in the semester, this was the only course commitment for the graduate students. Due to this compressed format, only one written assignment and a single oral presentation were assigned. As the small group format worked well via Zoom in the first iteration of the course, the small groups continued to meet using this virtual platform.

IRB Approval. The West Virginia University Institutional Review Board approved the study (WVU IRB Protocol#: 2008081739). Informed consent was provided by the participants in writing and all information was collected anonymously.

Surveys. Evaluation of training effectiveness was measured in two ways corresponding to the first two levels of the Kirkpatrick Model of Evaluation [ 41 ]. First, students completed a questionnaire upon completion of the course to capture their perceptions of training (Appendix VII). Students were asked their level of agreement/disagreement on a Likert scale with 10 statements about the course and 7 statements about their facilitator. Second, students took a pre- and post-test to measure differences in their ability to design experiments before and after training (Appendix VIII). The pre- and post-tests were identical, asking the students to design an experiment to test a specific hypothesis, include controls, plan analyses, and state possible results and interpretation. Five questions were provided for the pre- and post-test, where each question posed a hypothesis from a different biomedical discipline, e.g. cancer biology or neuroscience. Students were asked to choose one of the five questions to answer.

Peer-to-peer evaluations were collected to provide feedback on professionalism and teamwork. This survey utilized a Goldilocks scale ranging from 1 to 7, with 4 being the desired score. An example peer question asked about accountability, where responses included not accountable, e.g. always late (score = 1), accountable, e.g. punctual, well prepared, follows up (score = 4) and controlling, e.g. finds fault in others (score = 7). Each student provided a peer-to-peer evaluation for each student in their group. (see Appendix VII). In the second course iteration, Goldilocks surveys were collected three times over the three-week course period due to the compressed time frame. This was necessary to provide rapid feedback to the students about their performance during the course in order to provide opportunities to address and rectify any deficits before making final performance assessments.

Evaluating Pre- and Post-Tests. All pre- and post-test answers were evaluated by three graders in a blind fashion, where the graders were unaware if an answer came from a pre- or post-test. Prior to grading, each grader made up individual answer keys based upon the question(s) on the tests. The graders then met to compare and deliberate these preliminary keys, incorporating changes and edits to produce a single combined key to use for rating answers. While the students were asked to answer one question, some students chose to answer several questions. Superfluous answers were used as a training dataset for the graders. The graders independently scored each answer, then met to review the results and discuss modification of the grading key. The established final grading key, with a perfect score of 16, was utilized by the graders in independently evaluating the complete experimental dataset consisting of all pre- and post-test answers (Appendix IX). To assess the ability of student cohorts to design experiments before and after the course, three of the authors graded all of the pre- and post-test answers. Grading was performed in a blind fashion and the scores of the three raters were averaged for each answer.

Statistical analysis. To measure the interrater reliability of the graders, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. A two-way mixed effects model was utilized to evaluate consistency between multiple raters/measurements. The ICC for grading the training dataset was 0.82, indicating a good inter-rater agreement. The ICC for grading the experimental dataset was also 0.82. For comparison of pre-test vs. post-test performance, the scores of the three raters were averaged for each answer. Since answers were anonymous, the analyses compared responses between individuals. Most, but not all scores, exhibited a Gaussian distribution and therefore a nonparametric statistic, a one-tailed Mann Whitney U test, was used for comparison. The pre-test and post-test scores for 2020 and 2021 could not be compared due to the different format used for the course in each year.

Thirty students participated in the course in the first offering, while 27 students were enrolled in the second year. The students took pre- and post-tests to measure their ability to design an experiment before and after training (Appendix VIII). As the course progressed, students were surveyed on their views of the professionalism of other students in their group (Appendix VII). At the end of the course, students were asked to respond to surveys evaluating the course and their facilitator (see Appendix VII).

Student reception of the course (Kirkpatrick Level 1) . In the first year, 23 students responded to the course evaluation (77% response rate) and 26 students submitted facilitator evaluations (87% response rate), whereas in the second year there were 25 responses to the course evaluation (93% response rate) and 26 for facilitators (96% response rate). Likert scores for the 2020 and 2021 course evaluations are presented in Fig. 1 . The median score for each question was 4 on a scale of 5 in 2020. In 2021, the median scores for the questions about active learning and hypothesis testing were 5 and the median score of the other questions was 4. The students appreciated the efforts of the facilitators in the course, based upon their evaluations of the facilitators. The median score for every facilitator across all survey questions is shown in Fig. 2 . The median score for a single question in 2020 and 2021 was 4.5 and the median score for all other questions was 5. The results of the peer-to-peer evaluations are illustrated in Fig. 3 . The average score for each student were plotted, with scores further from the desired score of 4 indicating perceived behaviors that were not ideal. The wide range of scores in the 2020 survey were noted. The students completed three peer-to-peer surveys during the 2021 course. The range of scores in the 2021 peer-to-peer evaluation was narrower than the range in the 2020 survey. The range of scores was expected to narrow from the first (initial) to third (final) survey as students learned and implemented improvements in their professional conduct based upon peer feedback. The narrow range of scores in the initial survey left little room for improvement.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 12909_2023_4569_Fig1_HTML.jpg

Results of Course Evaluations by Students. Student evaluations of the course were collected at the end of each offering. The evaluation surveys are in Appendix VII. Violin plots showing the distribution and median score for each question in the 2020 survey (A) and the 2021 survey (B) are shown. The survey used a Likert scale (1 – low to 5 – high)

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 12909_2023_4569_Fig2_HTML.jpg

Results of Facilitator Evaluations by Students. Student evaluations of the facilitators were collected at the end of each offering of the course. The evaluation surveys are in Appendix VII. Violin plots showing the distribution and median score for each question in the 2020 survey (A) and the 2021 survey (B) are shown. The survey used a Likert scale (1 – low to 5 – high)

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 12909_2023_4569_Fig3_HTML.jpg

Results of Student Peer-to-Peer Evaluations. Student peer-to-peer evaluations were collected at the end of the course in year 1 (A) , and at the beginning (B) , the middle (C) and the end (D) of the course in year 2. Each student evaluated the professionalism of each other student in their group using the evaluation survey shown in Appendix VII. The average score for each student is plotted as a data point. The survey used a Goldilocks scale (range of 1 to 7) where the desired professional behavior is reflected by a score of 4

Student learning (Kirkpatrick Level 2). Twenty-six students completed the pre-test in each year and consented to participate in this study (87% response in the first year and 96% response in the second year). Eighteen students completed the post-test at the end of the first year (60%) and 26 students completed the test at the end of the second year (96%). Question selection (excluding students that misunderstood the assignment and answered all questions) is shown in Table 1 . The most frequently selected questions were Question 1 (45 times) and Question 2 (23 times). Interestingly, the results in Table 1 also indicate that students did not necessarily choose the same question to answer on the pre-test and post-test.

Student Choice of Experimental Question to Answer (Only those who made a choice)

2020		2021
Pre-test	Post-test	Pre-test	Post-test
10	8	13	14
3	5	7	8
2	2	2	3
4	1	4	0
2	0	0	1

Average scores on pre-tests and post-tests were compared using a one-tailed Mann Whitney U test. Since the format of the course was different in the two iterations, comparison of test results between the two years could not be made. The average scores of the pre- and post-test in 2020 were not statistically different (p = 0.0673), although the post-test scores trended higher. In contrast, the difference between the pre- and post-test in 2021 did reach statistical significance (p = 0.0329). The results collectively indicate an overall improvement in student ability in experimental design (Fig. 4 ).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is 12909_2023_4569_Fig4_HTML.jpg

Pre- and Post-Test Scores. At the beginning and end of each offering, the students completed a test to measure their ability to design an experiment (see Appendix VIII for the details of the exam). Three faculty graded every answer to the pre- and post-test using a common grading rubric (see Appendix IX). The maximum possible score was 16. The average score for each individual answer on the pre-test and post-test is represented as a single data point. The bar indicates the mean score across all answers +/- SD. The average scores of the pre- and post-test scores were compared using a one-tailed Mann Whitney U test. For the 2020 data (A) , p = 0.0673, and for the 2021 data (B) , p = 0.0329

This course was created in response to biomedical workforce training reports recommending increased training in general professional skills and scientific skills, e.g. critical thinking and experimental design. The course utilizes a PBL format, which is not extensively utilized in graduate education, to incorporate active learning throughout the experience. It was well received by students and analysis suggests that major goals of the course were met. This provides a template for other administrators and educators seeking to modify curricula in response to calls to modify training programs for doctoral students.

Student evaluations indicated the course was effective at motivating active learning and that students became more active learners. The evaluation survey questions were directly related to three specific course goals: (1) Students reported developing skills in problem solving, hypothesis testing and experimental design. (2) The course helped develop oral presentation skills and written communication skills (in one iteration of the course) and (3) students developed collaboration and team skills. Thus, from the students’ perspective, these three course goals were met. Student perceptions of peer professionalism was measured using peer-to-peer surveys. The wide range of Goldilocks scores in the first student cohort was unexpected. In the second student cohort changes in professional behavior were measured over time and the score ranges were narrower. The reasons for the difference between cohorts is unclear. One possibility for this discrepancy is that the first iteration of the course extended over one semester and was during the first full semester of the pandemic, impacting professional behavior and perceptions of professionalism. The second cohort completed a professionalism survey three times during the course. The narrow range of scores from this cohort in the initial survey made detection of improved professionalism over the course difficult. Results do indicate that professionalism improved in terms of respect and compassion between the first and last surveys. Finally, the results of the pre-test and post-test analysis demonstrated a trend of improved performance on the post-test relative to the pre-test for students in each year of the course and a statistical difference between the pre- and post-test scores in the second year.

Areas for improvement. The course was initially offered as a one-credit course. Student comments on course evaluations and comments in debriefing sessions with facilitators at the end of the course concurred that the work load exceeded that of a one credit course. As a result, the year two version was offered as a two-credit course to better align course credits with workload.

There were student misperceptions about the goals of the course in the first year. Some students equated experimental design with research methods and expressed disappointment that this was not a methods course. While learning appropriate methods is a goal of the course, the main emphasis is developing hypotheses and designing experiments to test the hypotheses. As such, the choice of methods was driven by the hypotheses and experimental design. This misperception was addressed in the second year by clearly elaborating on the course goals in an introductory class session.

The original course offering contained limited statistical exercises to simulate experimental planning and data analysis, e.g. students were required to conduct a power analysis. Between the first and second years of the course, the entire first semester biomedical sciences curriculum was overhauled with several new course offerings. This new curriculum contained an independent biostatistics workshop that students completed prior to the beginning of this course. Additional statistics exercises were incorporated into the PBL course to provide the students with more experience in the analysis of experimental results. Student evaluations indicated that the introduction of these additional exercises was not effective. Improved coordination between the biostatistics workshop and the PBL course is required to align expectations, better equipping students for the statistical analysis of experimental results encountered later in this course.

An important aspect that was evident from student surveys, facilitator discussions and debrief sessions was that improved coordination between the individual facilitators of the different groups is required to reduce intergroup variability. Due to class size, the students were divided into six groups, with each facilitator assigned to the same group for the duration of the course to maintain continuity. The facilitators met independent of the students throughout the course to discuss upcoming sessions and to share their experiences with their respective groups. This allowed the different facilitators to compare approaches and discuss emerging or perceived concerns/issues. In the second year, one facilitator rotated between different groups during each session to observe how the different student groups functioned. Such a real time faculty peer-evaluation process has the potential to reduce variability between groups, but was challenging to implement within the short three-week time period. Comprehensive training where all facilitators become well versed in PBL strategies and adhere to an established set of guidelines/script for each session is one mechanism that may reduce variability across different facilitator-group pairings.

Limitations. The current study has a number of limitations. The sample size for each class was small, with 30 students enrolled in the first year of the course and 27 students enrolled in the second. The response rates for the pre-tests were high (> 87%) but the response rate for the post-test varied between the first year (60%) and second year (96%) of the course. The higher response rate in the second year might be due to fewer end of semester surveys since this was the only course that the students took in that time period. Additionally, the post-test in the second year was conducted at a scheduled time, rather than on the student’s own time as was the case in year one. Due to restructuring of the graduate curriculum and the pandemic, the two iterations of the course were formatted differently. This precluded pooling the data from the two offerings and makes comparison between the outcomes difficult.

Presentation of the course was similar, but not identical, to all of the students. Six different PBL groups were required to accommodate the number of matriculating students in each year. Despite efforts to provide a consistent experience, there was variability between the different facilitators in running their respective groups. Further, the development of each session in each group was different, since discussion was driven by the students and their collective interests. These variables could be responsible for increasing the spread of scores on the post-tests and decreasing the value of the course for a subset of students.

The pre- and post-tests were conducted anonymously to encourage student participation. This prevented correlating the differential between pre- and post-test scores for each student and in comparing learning between different groups. The pre-test and post-test were identical, and provided the students with five options to design experiments (with identical instructions) in response to a different biomedical science problem. An alternative approach could have used isomorphic questions for the pre- and post-tests. It is clear that some students answered the same question on the pre- and post-test, and may benefit from answering the same question twice (albeit after taking the course). Some students clearly answered different questions on the pre- and post-test and the outcomes might be skewed if the two questions challenged the student differently.

While the course analysis captured the first two levels of the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation (reaction and learning), it did not attempt to measure the third level (behavior) or fourth level (results) [ 41 ]. Future studies are required to measure the third level. This could be achieved by asking students to elaborate on their experimental design used in recent experiments in their dissertation laboratory following completion of the course, or by evaluating the experimental design students incorporate into their dissertation proposals. The fourth Kirkpatrick level could potentially be assessed by surveying preceptors about their students’ abilities in experimental design in a longitudinal manner at semi- or annual committee meetings and accompanying written progress reports. The advantage of focusing on the first two Kirkpatrick levels of evaluation is that the measured outcomes can be confidently attributed to the course. Third and fourth level evaluations are more complicated, since they necessarily take place at some point after completion of the course. Thus, the third and fourth level outcomes can result from additional factors outside of the course (e.g. other coursework, working in the lab, attendance in student-based research forum, meeting with mentors, etc.). Another limiting factor is the use of a single test to measure student learning. Additional alternative approaches to measure learning might better capture differences between the pre- and post-test scores.

Implementation. This curriculum is readily scalable and can be modified for graduate programs of any size, with the caveat that larger programs will require more facilitators. At Van Andel, the doctoral cohorts are three to five new students per year and all are accommodated in one PBL group [ 25 ]. At our institution, we have scaled up to a moderate sized doctoral program with 25 to 30 matriculating students per year, dividing the students into six PBL groups (4–5 students each). Medical School classes frequently exceed 100 students (our program has 115–120 new students each fall) and typically have between five and eight students per group. Our graduate course has groups at the lower end of this range. This course could be scaled up by increasing the number of students in the group or by increasing the number of groups.

Consistency between groups is important so each group of students has a similar experience and reaps the full benefit of this experience. Regular meetings between the course coordinator and facilitators to discuss the content of upcoming sessions and define rubrics to guide student feedback and evaluation were mechanisms used to standardize between the different groups in this course (Appendix VI). In hindsight, the course would benefit from more rigorous facilitator training prior to participation in the course. While a number of our facilitators were veterans of a medical school PBL course, the necessary skillset required to effectively manage a graduate level PBL course that is centered on developing critical thinking and experimental design are different. Such training requires an extensive time commitment by the course coordinators and participating facilitators.

The most difficult task in developing this course involved the course conception and development of the problem-based assignments. Designing a COVID-19 based PBL course in 2020 required de novo development of all course material. This entailed collecting and compiling information about the virus and the disease to provide quick reference for facilitators to guide discussion in their groups, all in the face of constantly shifting scientific and medical knowledge, along with the complete lack of traditional peer-based academic social engagement due to the pandemic. In development of this course, three different COVID-based problems were identified, with appropriate general background material for each problem requiring extensive research and development. Background material on cell and animal models, general strategies for experimental manipulation and methods to measure specific outcomes were collected in each case. Student copies for each session were designed to contain a series of questions as a guide to identifying important background concepts. Facilitator copies for each session were prepared with the goal of efficiently and effectively guiding each class meeting. These guidelines contained ideas for discussion points, areas of elaboration and a truncated key of necessary information to guide the group (Appendix IV). Several PBL repositories exist (e.g. https://itue.udel.edu/pbl/problems/ , https://www.nsta.org/case-studies ) and MedEdPORTAL ( https://www.mededportal.org/ ) publishes medical-specific cases. These provide valuable resources for case-based ideas, but few are specifically geared for research-focused biomedical graduate students. As such, modification of cases germane to first year biomedical graduate students with a research-centered focus is required prior to implementation. Finally, appropriate support materials for surveys and evaluation rubrics requires additional development and refinement of current or existing templates to permit improved evaluation of learning outcomes (Appendix VI).

Development of an effective PBL course takes considerable time and effort to conceive and construct. Successful implementation requires the requisite higher administrative support to identify and devote the necessary and appropriate faculty needed for course creation, the assignment of skilled faculty to serve as facilitators and staff support to coordinate the logistics for the course. It is critical that there is strong faculty commitment amongst the facilitators to devote the time and energy necessary to prepare and to successfully facilitate a group of students. Strong institutional support is linked to facilitator satisfaction and commitment to the PBL-based programs [ 42 ]. Institutional support can be demonstrated in multiple ways. The time commitment for course developers, coordinators and facilitators should be accurately reflected in teaching assignments. Performance in these roles in PBL should factor into decisions about support for professional development, e.g. travel awards, and merit based pay increases. Further, efforts in developing, implementing and executing a successful PBL course should be recognized as important activities during annual faculty evaluations by departmental chairs and promotion and tenure committees.

Key Takeaways. The creation and implementation of this course was intellectually stimulating and facilitators found their interactions with students gratifying. From student survey responses and test results the course was at least modestly successful at achieving its goals. Based upon our experience, important issues to consider when deciding to implement such a curriculum include: (1) support of the administration for developing the curriculum, (2) facilitator buy-in to the approach, (3) continuity (not uniformity) between PBL groups, (4) other components of the curriculum and how they might be leveraged to enhance the effectiveness of PBL and (5) effort required to develop and deliver the course, which must be recognized by the administration.

Future Directions. Novel curriculum development is an often overlooked but important component to contemporary graduate student education in the biomedical sciences. It is critical that modifications incorporated in graduate education are evidence based. We report the implementation of a novel PBL course for training in the scientific skill sets required for developing and testing hypotheses, and demonstrate its effectiveness. Additional measures to assess the course goals in improving critical thinking, experimental design and self-efficacy in experimental design will be implemented using validated tests [ 22 , 43 – 45 ]. Further studies are also required to determine the long-term impact of this training on student performance in the laboratory and progression towards degree. It will be interesting to determine if similar curriculum changes to emphasize development of skills will shorten the time to degree, a frequent recommendation for training the modern biomedical workforce [ 1 , 46 – 48 ].

Incorporation of courses emphasizing development of skills can be done in conjunction with traditional didactic instruction to build the necessary knowledge base for modern biomedical research. Our PBL course was stand-alone, requiring the students to research background material prior to hypothesis development and experimental design. Coordination between the two modalities would obviate the need for background research in the PBL component, reinforce the basic knowledge presented didactically through application, and prepare students for higher order thinking about the application of the concepts learned in the traditional classroom. Maintaining a balance between problem-based and traditional instruction may also be key in improving faculty engagement into such new and future initiatives. Continued investments in the creation and improvement of innovative components of graduate curricula centered around developing scientific skills of doctoral students can be intellectually stimulating for faculty and provide a better training environment for students. The effort may be rewarded by streamlining training and strengthening the biomedical workforce of the future.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Mary Wimmer and Drew Shiemke for many discussions over the years about PBL in the medical curriculum and examples of case studies. We thank Steve Treisenberg for initial suggestions and discussions regarding PBL effectiveness in the Van Andel Institute. Thanks to Paul and Julie Lockman for discussions about PBL in School of Pharmacy curricula and examples of case studies. Special thanks to the facilitators of the groups, Stan Hileman, Hunter Zhang, Paul Chantler, Yehenew Agazie, Saravan Kolandaivelu, Hangang Yu, Tim Eubank, William Walker, and Amanda Gatesman-Ammer. Without their considerable efforts the course could never have been successfully implemented. Thanks to the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Medicine for supporting the development of this project. MS is the director of the Cell & Molecular Biology and Biomedical Engineering Training Program (T32 GM133369).

Abbreviations

PBL	Problem-based learning
STEM	Science, technology, engineering, and math
K-12	kindergarten through grade 12
ICC	Intraclass coefficient>
SARS-CoV2	severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
COVID-19	Coronavirus disease 19

Author contributions

SW and MS developed the concept for the course. MS was responsible for creation and development of all of the content, for the implementation of the course, the design of the study and creating the first draft of the manuscript. MG, MRG and SW graded the pre- and post-test answers in a blind fashion. MS, MG, MRG and SW analyzed the data and edited the manuscript.

There was no funding available for this work.

Data Availability

Declarations.

The authors declare no competing interests.

The West Virginia University Institutional Review Board approved the study (WVU IRB Protocol#: 2008081739). Informed consent was provided in writing and all information was collected anonymously. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Not applicable.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

IMAGES

Critical Thinking in Doctoral Clinical Psychology
(PDF) Development of Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students in Education
(PDF) Critical Thinking and its Importance in Doctoral Education
Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions
(PDF) PROFESSIONAL SELF-CONCEPT OF THE DOCTORAL STUDENTS OF EDUCATION
Frequency of critical thinking engagement of doctoral students in

VIDEO

Immersive Critical Thinking Activities: Think Like A Scientist
Change Agents Prepared to Make a Difference in Mental Health
Critical thinking at university
Teacher De-Wokefies Student By Teaching Critical Thinking
International Innovation Program for Post-Doctoral Fellow
International Innovation Program for Post-Doctoral Fellow

COMMENTS

Critical Thinking at the Doctoral Level
New doctoral students tend to focus on the lower level skills since the educational system at the levels below the doctorate tend to emphasize their use. As a doctoral student, however, your work must reflect all levels of thinking, particularly the higher-order thinking skills of analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.
PDF Development of Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students in Education
The descriptive analysis established that 11.3% present critical thinking at the advanced level. Keywords: critical thinking, research, education, reasoning, academic management. 1. Introduction. The university formation had a deep change from its law promulgated in July 2014. Until then, professional training was focused on traditional and ...
Train PhD students to be thinkers not just specialists
Our offerings are different from others at the graduate level. We have critical-thinking assignments in which students analyse errors in reasoning in a New York Times opinion piece about 'big ...
Developing Critical Thinking
In a time where deliberately false information is continually introduced into public discourse, and quickly spread through social media shares and likes, it is more important than ever for young people to develop their critical thinking. That skill, says Georgetown professor William T. Gormley, consists of three elements: a capacity to spot ...
The Importance of Critical Thinking in Grad School (and ...
The Importance of Critical Thinking in Grad School (and Everywhere Else) Philosophers such as Plato and Socrates have waxed about the art of critical thinking for ages. The ability to make well-informed, conscious decisions based on information and thoughtful reflection before acting or expressing an opinion is a skill that has always been ...
PDF G Thinking and Writing Critically for D Students
ING AND WRITING CRITICALLY FOR DOCTORAL STUDENTSBeing able to think and write critically about research, arguments and findings - both other people's and your own - is one of the most imp. rtant skills required in completing a doctorate. Being critical does not mean "criticising" in a negative way, but instead involves carefully ...
Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design
Traditionally, doctoral student education in the biomedical sciences relies on didactic coursework to build a foundation of scientific knowledge and an apprenticeship model of training in the laboratory of an established investigator. Recent recommendations for revision of graduate training include the utilization of graduate student competencies to assess progress and the introduction of ...
Developing critical thinking in doctoral students ...
The students' critical thinking ability in the first cycle of the average of 71.67 students who meet the KKM is 17 students or 56.66% and on the second cycle 80.16 that meet the KKM is 23 students ...
Critical Thinking and its Importance in Doctoral Education
Critical thinking is a process that, like any. process, receives inputs tha t are transformed. through a mechanism which, for the case of. doctoral education, consists in making use of. the ...
Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions
The PhD is the highest level of academic qualification, and is by its very nature an exercise in the development of critical thinking. This chapter discusses what it means to study for a PhD and the problems that students have with developing skills of criticality. The author discusses his own experiences of supervising over 50 doctoral students and relates this to the relevant literature. The ...
Full article: A 'doctoral compass': strategic reflection, self
Linking it to critical thinking, through supervisors' feedback, doctoral scholars are increasingly made aware that the critical component remains absent from their writing. ... Assaad Azzi, Mariane Frenay, Benoit Galand, and Olivier Klein. 2017. "Doctoral Students' Experiences Leading to Completion or Attrition: A Matter of Sense ...
PDF How Faculty and Students Understand and Experience the Development of
problematic to teach critical thinking to students (Stedman & Adams, 2012). Even more, teachers do not agree ... applied to post-graduate situations, thus satisfying the demands of employers (Danczak et al., 2017). While utilizing critical thinking skills in the classroom and applying that learning to real-world situations can be
Conditions for Criticality in Doctoral Education: A Creative Concern
Abstract. The demand for developing profound critical thinking in doctoral education is a serious concern since today's doctoral students are the academics and societal leaders of tomorrow. Thus they need to be well prepared for handling the rapid changes of academia, and society at large, in deliberate, transformative, and responsible ways.
Critical and creative thinking nexus: learning experiences of doctoral
Abstract. Critical and creative thinking constitute important learning outcomes at doctoral level across the world. While the literature on doctoral education illuminates this matter through the lens of experienced senior researchers, the doctoral students' own perspective is missing.
Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions
King et al (1990) discuss the issue of assessing critical thinking in graduate students, noting that there is little agreement as to what constitutes critical thinking. Onwuegbuzie (2001) compared critical thinking skills in Master's and doctoral students and concluded that, as might be expected, the doctoral students exhibited considerably ...
Does College Teach Critical Thinking? A Meta-Analysis
Even without explicit attempts to foster critical thinking, there is certainly a widespread perception that college breeds critical thinkers. Tsui (1998) reported that 92% of students in a large multi-institution study believed they had made some gains in critical thinking, and 39.3% thought their critical thinking had grown much stronger. Only 8.9% believed it had not changed or had grown weaker.
Training doctoral students in critical thinking and ...
This problem-based learning course appears effective in training newly matriculated graduate students in the required skills for designing experiments to test specific hypotheses, enhancing student preparation prior to initiation of their dissertation research. ... Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design using ...
PDF Training Doctoral Students in Critical Thinking and ...
While PBL-trained students recalled less in the short term, long-term knowledge retention was higher than traditional students (21, 26, 27). Although few studies report the outcomes of PBL based approaches in graduate education, this platform may prove useful for training biomedical science doctoral students in critical thinking and
Critical thinking
Interestingly, Barnett suggests that critical thinking is not just passive. Brodin tells us how Barnett distinguishes between critical reason (formal knowledge), critical self-reflection (directed at the self) and critical action in the world. Brodin then makes the important point that for PhD students (and academics for that matter) academia ...
Full article: Cultivating Critical Thinking Skills: a Pedagogical Study
Students' critical thinking development was assessed using a well-established rubric across four dimensions: presenting evidence, explaining issues, articulating influence of context and assumptions, and systematically presenting a conclusion. Our study distinguishes itself by utilizing objective measures for assessing critical thinking ...
Professional Presentation/Defense
3. Creative and Critical Thinking. Doctoral students must seek continuous improvement through professional service and research opportunities. Examining their position within a learning community occurs through self-reflection and continuous engagement with others to share best practices and design a positive learning environment.
CRIT 602 (07)
This course reinforces critical analysis and strategic thinking skills for students developing their course of study, seeking professional advancement, or preparing for future graduate study. Students with a regionally-accredited associate degree do not have to take either ENG 420 or CRIT 501 as prerequisites for CRIT 602.
Teaching in 10 Words
Graduate Student Series; Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning Kresge Library, Room 430 100 Library Drive Rochester, Michigan 48309-4479 (location map) (248) 370-2751 [email protected] ... To stimulate critical thinking, I require students to participate in online Q&A forums. These platforms serve as collaborative spaces where ...
Our kids are missing out on critical thinking
A US study noted that 45 per cent of college students showed no significant gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning, or writing skills over their four-year degree. Since the inception of the modern university in Bologna in 1088, critical thinking has been a desirable - arguably the most desirable- 'graduate attribute'.
Current doctoral students
Current doctoral students. Research students in the School of Education undertake research that encompasses critical thinking and the evaluation of contemporary issues that affect communities in local, national and global contexts. Their interests are broad and interdisciplinary.
(PDF) Development of Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students in
Critical thinking in university studies is the cornerstone for the development of research processes at the doctoral level; it becomes the vector of this action, whose processes in the management of learning will require that the competencies understood are developed by teachers and students, for the achievement of the goals proposed by the actors involved.
Critical Thinking
The "Critical Thinking" course at Atlantic International University equips students with essential analytical and problem-solving skills vital for personal and professional success. It explores the foundations of critical thinking, emphasizing the importance of evaluating information objectively and considering multiple perspectives.
Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of
This study investigates the effectiveness of panel discussions, a specific interactive teaching technique where a group of students leads a pre-planned, topic-focused discussion with audience participation, in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses for international medical students. This approach aims to simulate professional conference discussions, preparing students for future academic ...
Entrepreneurship Games for Students: Activities for the Student
Students engage in hands-on exercises where they make decisions, solve problems, and manage resources — mirroring the experiences of entrepreneurs. These games foster critical thinking, creativity, and practical skills such as teamwork and decision-making. By providing a dynamic learning environment, entrepreneurship games prepare students to ...
Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design
Here we describe the development, implementation and evaluation of a new problem-based learning (PBL)-based graduate course that provides an initial experience in introducing the scientific career-relevant core competencies of critical thinking and experimental design to incoming biomedical doctoral students.

Robert E. Levasseur, PhD

Blog Categories

Recent Posts

Critical Thinking at the Doctoral Level

Train PhD students to be thinkers not just specialists

Access options

Related Articles

ATLAS - Joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Researcher/Associate Researcher

Supervisory Bioinformatics Specialist CTG Program Head

Post Doctoral Research Scientist

Postdoctoral Associate- Neuromodulation and Computational Psychiatry

Quick links

The Importance of Critical Thinking in Grad School (and Everywhere Else)

Why is critical thinking so important?

How to become a critical thinker

The bottom line

Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions

3 Citations

A Qualitative Deconstruction of Consumerism: The Case of Lost Community

Conditions for Criticality in Doctoral Education: A Creative Concern

Access this chapter

Similar content being viewed by others

Promoting Critical Thinking in Higher Education: My Experiences as the Inaugural Eugene H. Fram Chair in Applied Critical Thinking at Rochester Institute of Technology

A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education

Editor information

About this chapter

Download citation

Share this chapter

Export Reference

Developing Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students: Issues and Solutions

Key Terms in this Chapter

Complete Chapter List

Save citation to file

Add to My Bibliography

Training doctoral students in critical thinking and experimental design using problem-based learning

Conflict of interest statement

Similar articles

Related information

LinkOut - more resources

Critical thinking – the hardest doctoral skill of all?

Share this:

Whisper to me....

Discover more from The Thesis Whisperer

Professional Presentation/Defense

What are Educator Dispositions?

1. Learning Environment

2. Collaboration

3. Creative and Critical Thinking

4. Professionalism

5. Diversity

Altan, Lane, & Dottin. (2019). Using habits of mind, intelligent behaviors, and educational theories to create a conceptual framework for developing effective teaching dispositions. Journal of Teacher Education, 70 (2), 169-183. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487117736024

Select THREE of the following professional dispositions for reflection.

Course Search

Teaching in 10 Words

The art of asking questions: teaching science as a dialogue

Students can do hard things: building critical thinking through scaffolding

Aiming to understand why

School of Education

Development of Critical Thinking in Doctoral Students in Education

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Please enter your credentials

Critical Thinking

Publication:

Atlantic International University

Pioneer Plaza 900 Fort Street Mall 905 Honolulu, HI 96813

AIU Success Stories

Albert Einstein

Mahatma Gandhi

Cicero Roman

Contact Us Atlantic International University

Evaluating panel discussions in ESP classes: an exploration of international medical students’ and ESP instructors’ perspectives through qualitative research

Introduction

Theoretical framework

Methodology

Participants and context of the study

Panel discussion activity design and implementation

Research tools and data collection