The Terrill A. Mast TLM Foundation Editors’ Choice Award recognizes Teaching and Learning in Medicine publications that exemplify this journal’s founding mission to “provide the theoretical foundations and practical analysis needed for effective educational decision making.” Per Foundation stipulation, a panel of seven TLM editorial board members meets annually to consider research articles published in the previous year. The Award’s selection criteria are listed next and reflect our aim to feature innovative inquiry that advances theory and is packaged in ways that educators can use to enhance their practice:
Impact on Theory: The perceived degree to which the article helps build explanations, illuminate the role of context, and/or promote the asking of new questions. Outstanding articles according to this criterion go beyond providing new knowledge to promote new understanding.
Impact on Practice: The perceived degree to which the article enables educators to design or implement something with confidence that it will work in their setting. Outstanding articles according to this criterion go beyond providing insight on how to do something to fuel capacity to educate.
Innovativeness: Not all that is new is innovative. Outstanding articles according to this criterion push the boundary, going past incremental improvements or change to shifting paradigms and turning established ideas on their head.
Accessibility: Not all findings that are impactful or innovative are accessible to a wide audience. Outstanding articles according to this criterion present the material in a way that clearly indicates their utility to educational decision-making and their importance to theoretical understanding.
I chose the following articles as candidates for the 2019 award (from Volume 30, 2018, in order of publication):
Sanne Peters, Geraldine Clarebout, Marc van Nuland, Bert Aertgeerts, & Ann Roex. A Qualitative Exploration of Multiple Perspectives on Transfer of Learning Between Classroom and Clinical Workplace. https://bit.ly/2VlOeFD
Victoria Smith, Cheri Bethune, & Katrina F. Hurley. Examining Medical Student Specialty Choice Through a Gender Lens: An Orientational Qualitative Study. https://bit.ly/3023xSH
Ruth E. Levine, Nicole J. Borges, Brenda J. B. Roman, Lisa R. Carchedi, Mark H. Townsend, Jeffrey S. Cluver, Julia Frank, Oma Morey, Paul Haidet, & Britta M. Thompson. High-Stakes Collaborative Testing: Why Not? https://bit.ly/2VPTbGb
Michelle M. Daniel, Paula Ross, Renée E. Stalmeijer, & Willem de Grave. Teacher Perspectives of Interdisciplinary Coteaching Relationships in a Clinical Skills Course: A Relational Coordination Theory Analysis. https://bit.ly/2ZVdPE2
G. Michael Leffel, Ross A. Oakes Mueller, Sandra A. Ham, Kyle E. Karches, Farr A. Curlin, & John D. Yoon. Project on the Good Physician: Further Evidence for the Validity of a Moral Intuitionist Model of Virtuous Caring. https://bit.ly/2Wu6CsD
Reviewing all of the previous year’s publications in light of the Editors’ Choice selection criteria offered an opportunity to reflect more broadly on the alignment between TLM’s vision and our day-to-day decision-making. Each year, this is an enjoyable pause to appreciate the contributions of our authors (and reviewers!), and it is a stimulating exercise of self-examination and continuous improvement. I chose the preceding articles for the panel’s consideration because, among all of our high-quality 2018 research publications, they represent an exemplary balance of theory and practice. Although research articles (i.e., Investigations, Groundwork, and Validation articles) were my focus, the selection process renewed my impression that our conceptual Observations articles and our Educational Case Reports also promote important insights into educational scholarship.
The following selection panelists thoughtfully reviewed this year’s candidates:
Heeyoung Han, Ph.D., Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Debra Klamen, M.D., MHPE, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Anneke Metz, Ph.D., Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Bridget O’Brien, Ph.D., University of California San Francisco School of Medicine
Boyd F. Richards, Ph.D., University of Utah School of Medicine
Nicole Roberts, Ph.D., Sophie Davis School for Biomedical Education
David P. Way, M.Ed., The Ohio State University College of Medicine
The panel carefully considered the candidates, independently rating each on the selection criteria using a scale of 1 to 5 and providing brief remarks justifying their ratings. To make a selection, the candidate articles were ranked within each panelist according to the sum of their ratings on the four criteria. The best-ranking article across panelists was then selected to receive the Editors’ Choice Award: recognition and a prize of no less than $500 or no less than $100 per author.
Based on the panel’s ratings, we present this year’s selection:
Daniel, Ross, Stalmeijer, & de Grave. Teacher Perspectives of Interdisciplinary Coteaching Relationships in a Clinical Skills Course: A Relational Coordination Theory Analysis
In this article, Daniel et al. examined the relationship perceptions of 23 medical doctors and social behavioral scientists assigned to coteaching dyads to deliver a longitudinal (18-month) Doctoring course focused on patient-centered communication, physical examination skills, oral and written case presentations, professionalism, reflection, and various social behavioral topics. The authors used a constructivist grounded theory approach to conduct and analyze interviews in which teachers described their experiences with coteaching relationships and what they perceived as promoting or impeding these relationships. Daniel et al. incorporated the five themes they constructed—Respect, Shared Goals, Shared Knowledge and Understanding, Communication, and Complementary Pairings—into a conceptual framework informed by relational coordination theory to account for how personal factors shared by coteachers (Complementary Pairings) promote high-quality relationships (Respect, Shared Goals, Shared Knowledge and Understanding) and open, honest, and personal collaborative problem solving (Communication). The authors conclude their article with a suggested faculty development exercise for coteachers in which each teacher reflects on their beliefs, values, assumptions, and expectations around Respect, Shared Goals, Shared Knowledge and Understanding, and Communication.
Panelists’ comments on this article included the following:
A delightful article. Very much grounded in theory throughout. A very good qualitative analysis. Extensive comments from same really helped illustrate the points. The article started with theory, brought it back to practical (a highly relevant faculty development tool was included) and then ended with the advancement of an already existing theory. All done in a way that was easy to read! I really loved this article!
This was a nicely designed qualitative study that was very readable. I greatly appreciated the clear, concrete advice on structuring and developing teaching partnerships, which would work well as an instruction manual for any institution wishing to improve/implement co-teaching in undergraduate medical education.
I see many strengths in this article. The authors know the literature on co-teaching well and link the article to that literature. They provide a compelling rationale for studying this inductively in undergraduate medical education - what makes this context unique from K-12 and higher education. The authors link their findings to Relational Coordination Theory… I appreciate the willingness to link to existing theory that fits vs. generating 'new' theory.
I feel this piece gives readers a balanced set of findings that both push theory and practice. The practical suggestions given make it very accessible.
This was another exemplary paper describing research that made an attempt to link to preexisting theory…through the identification of “relational coordination theory” as a supporting framework for the qualitative research findings… The article was very accessible to TLM readers from across the medical education spectrum.
The Daniel et al. study exemplified the kind of cross-disciplinary scholarly collaboration a medical educator can lead to deepen understanding and improve education, making one institution’s efforts to improve practice useful to the broader community. This study also was an international collaboration between investigators in the United States and the Netherlands, embodying TLM’s goal to serve a global readership. Please join me in extending warm congratulations to these authors for their enlightening contribution to understanding teachers and how they may be empowered to deliver the best education possible. I encourage readers to explore this article and all of the 2019 Editors’ Choice candidates; our publisher, Taylor & Francis, has released these articles for Open Access through the end of the year.
Editor-in-Chief