Am J Perinatol 2024; 41(S 01): e2562-e2573
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1772227
Original Article

Best Practices and Educator Strategies for Facilitating a Flipped Classroom in Graduate Medical Education

Alison Falck
1   Department of Pediatrics, University of California, San Francisco, California
,
Heather French
2   Department of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Rita Dadiz
3   Department of Pediatrics, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
,
4   Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington
,
Amber Mendres-Smith
5   Department of Pediatrics, University of Maryland, School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Bret Nolan
6   Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Orange County, Orange, California
,
Kirsti Martin
7   Department of Pediatrics, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
,
Margarita M. Vasquez
8   Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas
› Author Affiliations

Funding This study was funded by SPARK-Ed: Penn Medicine Educational Grant.
Preview

Abstract

Objective Effective flipped classroom (FC) education fosters learner engagement, promoting higher-level cognitive skills. FC learning in graduate medical education (GME) has increased, but few educators have significant experience with FC facilitation. There are no evidence-based practices to support professional development of FC facilitation skills in GME. The objective of this study is to identify best practices for effective FC facilitation in GME.

Study Design We conducted a mixed-methods, cross-sectional study of faculty educators who participated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) using FC for physiology education in neonatal–perinatal medicine. Educators completed a 25-question survey about effective strategies for FC facilitation. A subset of educators participated in interviews to share their FC facilitation experiences and strategies to maximize learner engagement. Quantitative survey data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative survey and interview data were coded and analyzed inductively to identify themes.

Results Seventy-five educators completed the survey (75/136, 55% response rate), and 11 participated in semistructured interviews. While educators facilitated a median of two FC sessions (interquartile range: 1, 5) during the RCT, 43 (57%) had not received prior training in FC facilitation. Qualitative data analyses generated five themes that aligned with quantitative survey results: (1) educator preferences, (2) unique FC facilitation skills, (3) learning environment optimization, (4) subject matter expertise, and (5) learner behavior management. Sixty-two educators (83%) felt they were well prepared to lead FC sessions. Thirty-six educators (48%) reported that unprepared learners disrupt the learning environment, and the provision of clear expectations and adequate time to prepare for FCs improves learner preparation. Strategies to facilitate effective FC sessions included creating a safe learning environment and engaging learners in critical thinking.

Conclusion Educators highlighted faculty development needs, strategies, and actions to promote effective FC facilitation. Further exploration through learner interviews will provide additional evidence for the development of best practices and resources for FC facilitation.

Key Points

  • Educators prefer the FC educational modality over traditional didactic lectures.

  • Prior experiences in simulation debriefing provide foundational skills for new FC facilitators.

  • Setting learner expectations and ensuring safe space in the classroom encourage learner engagement.

  • Educator and learner preparation for FC is essential to optimize the learning experience.

  • Unique approaches in facilitation are required to support all types of learners.

Note

The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia's Institutional Review Board approved this study and waived written consent.


Authors' Contributions

H.F. and M.M.G. conceptualized this work. A.F., A.M-S., and R.D. provided themes and categories for qualitative interview data and A.F. wrote up the qualitative data for the manuscript. M.M.G. provided the figures and interpretation of the data. M.V. drafted the initial manuscript and reviewed and completed the final manuscript. H.F. and R.D. reworked the manuscript and provided edits and discussion. All authors reviewed and revised the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.




Publication History

Received: 01 April 2023

Accepted: 10 July 2023

Article published online:
09 August 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA