Provoking a Conversation Around Students’ and Supervisors’ Expectations Regarding Workplace Learning

Abstract

Construct: This study presents a tool that can facilitate a conversation about students’ and supervisors’ expectations concerning responsibilities during workplace learning. Background: It is often unclear who is responsible for facilitating learning opportunities in the workplace. In order to increase learning opportunities, it is important that expectations are discussed and alignment is reached between the student’s and supervisor’s expectations. This study collected and interpreted validity evidence for a tool that aims to provoke such a conversation. Approach: Three types of validity evidence were collected: response process, content, and consequences evidence. Educational leaders, medical teachers, and students of four medical schools were involved. The data collection consisted of cognitive interviews, a modified Delphi approach (with three rounds of inquiry), completed tools, and narrative comments. Findings: This study showed that the expectations of most students and supervisors were not initially aligned. The conversation, for which the tool aims to be a catalyst, facilitated better alignment of expectations about responsibilities during workplace learning. Moreover, the students’ perceived degree of consensus and satisfaction after the conversation were very high. Conclusions: This study underlined the relevance and usefulness of a tool that facilitates conversation about expectations regarding responsibilities, potentially enhancing learning opportunities at the workplace.

Keywords:

• Workplace learning
• communication
• responsibility
• expectations

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank Evi Grauwet for her help in the data collection.

Notes

1 All competences acquired on the university campus (e.g. at the skills lab or during simulation-based sessions)

2 This term refers to all individuals who collaborate with a supervisor

3 Depending on the context, the terms ‘trainees’ and ‘residents’ also were used.