Dataset Information

The impact of national culture in the development of complexity reasoning skills: An international comparison.

ABSTRACT: There is a clear inequality in gender distribution for the STEM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). Furthermore, there is a noticeable lack of diversity and a socio-economic gap that requires actionable solutions. To explore potential factors that affect the participation of women in STEM, this paper reviews two possible groups of determinants: national culture and complexity thinking. A survey with 684 respondents from higher education institutions in Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, and Spain was undertaken. The instrument measured four components of complexity thinking namely critical, scientific, innovative, and systemic). Using analysis of variance between two groups and between multiple groups, differences were observed between the countries' samples and between genders. Once the significance was confirmed, boxplots for each dimension were elaborated to facilitate the visualization of the distributions. The scores were compared with the national culture values to seek possible behavioral patterns in the data. The results reveal two groups between the observed countries. Also, there are clear indications of a relationship between the national culture dimensions and the complex thinking components.

SUBMITTER: Rodriguez-Abitia G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10585377 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The impact of national culture in the development of complexity reasoning skills: An international comparison.

Rodríguez-Abitia Guillermo G Ramírez-Montoya María Soledad MS Martínez-Pérez Sandra S López-Caudana Edgar Omar EO

Heliyon 20231011 10

There is a clear inequality in gender distribution for the STEM areas (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). Furthermore, there is a noticeable lack of diversity and a socio-economic gap that requires actionable solutions. To explore potential factors that affect the participation of women in STEM, this paper reviews two possible groups of determinants: national culture and complexity thinking. A survey with 684 respondents from higher education institutions in Chile, Ecuador, Mexi ...[more]

PMID: 37867901

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make a diagnosis and reach treatment decisions. This paper describes the use of four clinical reasoning tests in the second National Medical Science Olympiad in Iran: key features (KF), script concordance (SCT), clinical reasoning problems (CRP) and comprehensive integrative puzzles (CIP). The purpose of the study was to design a multi instrument for multiple roles approach in clinical reasoning field based on the theoretical framework, KF was used to measure data gathering, CRP was used to measure hypothesis formation, SCT and CIP were used to measure hypothesis evaluation and investigating the combined use of these tests in the Olympiad. A bank of clinical reasoning test items was developed for emergency medicine by a scientific expert committee representing all the medical schools in the country. These items were pretested by a reference group and the results were analyzed to select items that could be omitted. Then 135 top-ranked medical students from 45 medical universities in Iran participated in the clinical domain of the Olympiad. The reliability of each test was calculated by Cronbach's alpha. Item difficulty and the correlation between each item and the total score were measured. The correlation between the students' final grade and each of the clinical reasoning tests was calculated, as was the correlation between final grades and another measure of knowledge, i.e., the students' grade point average.ResultsThe combined reliability for all four clinical reasoning tests was 0.91. Of the four clinical reasoning tests we compared, reliability was highest for CIP (0.91). The reliability was 0.83 for KF, 0.78 for SCT and 0.71 for CRP. Most of the tests had an acceptable item difficulty level between 0.2 and 0.8. The correlation between the score for each item and the total test score for each of the four tests was positive. The correlations between scores for each test and total score were highest for KF and CIP. The correlation between scores for each test and grade point average was low to intermediate for all four of the tests.ConclusionThe combination of these four clinical reasoning tests is a reliable evaluation tool that can be implemented to assess clinical reasoning skills in talented undergraduate medical students, however these data may not generalizable to whole medical students population. The CIP and KF tests showed the greatest potential to measure clinical reasoning skills. Grade point averages did not necessarily predict performance in the clinical domain of the national competitive examination for medical school students.

Project description:BackgroundDidactic lectures remain common in medical education. Many faculty physicians do not receive formal training on public presentations or leading instructional sessions. Coaching has emerged in medical education with the potential to positively impact skills. We sought to evaluate a novel, national faculty peer-coaching program created to improve lecture presentation skills and foster career development.MethodsThis was a mixed-methods study of participant and faculty perceptions after completing the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine Academy Coaching Program. Participants completed an online evaluative survey consisting of multiple choice and Likert-type items. Program coaches participated in semistructured interviews. Descriptive statistics were reported for survey data. Thematic qualitative analysis by two independent reviewers was performed on interview data.ResultsDuring 2012 to 2017, a total of 30 participants and 11 coaches from 37 residency programs across the United States engaged in the program. Twenty-four (80%) participants completed the survey. Eight (73%) coaches participated in semistructured interviews. Data were collected between October and December 2018. The mean ± SD numbers of national presentations participants had given before and after the coaching program were 6.92 ± 7.68 and 16.42 ± 15.43, respectively. Since their coaching, most participants (87.5%) have been invited to give a lecture at another institution. Many participants felt that the program improved their lecture evaluations, public speaking, ability to engage an audience, and professional development. Almost all (92%) would recommend the program to a colleague. The coaches perceived multiple benefits including improved skills, self-reflection, networking, career advancement, and personal fulfillment. Suggestions for improvement included improved administrative processes, more clear expectations, increased marketing, and increased participant and coach engagement.ConclusionParticipants and coaches perceived multiple benefits from this novel, national faculty coaching program. With identification of the success, challenges, and suggestions for improvement, others may benefit as they develop coaching programs in medical education.

Project description:BackgroundSerious games (SGs) have emerged as engaging and instructional digital simulation tools that are increasingly being used for military medical training. SGs are often compared with traditional media in terms of learning outcomes, but it remains unclear which of the 2 options is more efficient and better accepted in the process of knowledge acquisition.ObjectiveThis study aimed to create and test a scenario-based system suitable for enhancing rescue reasoning skills in tactical combat casualty care.MethodsTo evaluate the effectiveness of the SGs, a randomized, observational, comparative trial was conducted. A total of 148 members from mobile medical logistics teams were recruited for training. Pre- and posttraining assessments were conducted using 2 different formats: a video-based online course (n=78) and a game simulation (n=70). We designed 3 evaluation instruments based on the first 2 levels of the Kirkpatrick model (reaction and learning) to measure trainees' satisfaction, knowledge proficiency, and self-confidence.ResultsThere were 4 elements that made up the learning path for the SGs: microcourses (video-based online courses), self-test, game simulation, and record query. The knowledge test scores in both groups were significantly higher after the intervention (t154=-6.010 and t138=-7.867, respectively; P<.001). For 5 simulation cases, the average operation time was 13.6 (SD 3.3) minutes, and the average case score was 279.0 (SD 57.6) points (from a possible total of 500 points), with a score rate of only 44% (222/500 points) to 67% (336/500 points). The results indicated no significant difference in trainees' satisfaction between the 2 training methods (P=.04). However, the game simulation method outperformed the video-based online course in terms of learning proficiency (t146=-2.324, P=.02) and self-perception (t146=-5.492, P<.001).ConclusionsDespite the high satisfaction reported by trainees for both training methods, the game simulation approach demonstrated superior efficiency and acceptance in terms of knowledge acquisition, self-perception, and overall performance. The developed SG holds significant potential as an essential assessment tool for evaluating frontline rescue skills and rescue reasoning in mobile medical logistics teams.

Dataset Information

The impact of national culture in the development of complexity reasoning skills: An international comparison.

Publications

The impact of national culture in the development of complexity reasoning skills: An international comparison.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets