Gender Differences in the Amount and Type of Student Participation During In-Person and Virtual Classes in Academic Medicine Learning Environments.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Cromer SJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8756329 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Overwhelming evidence demonstrating the benefits of active-learning pedagogy has led to a shift in teaching that requires students to interact more in the classroom. To date, few studies have assessed whether there are gender-specific differences in participation in active-learning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses, and fewer have looked across different types of classroom participation. Over two semesters, we observed an introductory biology course at a large research-intensive university and categorized student participation into seven distinct categories to identify gender gaps in participation. Additionally, we collected student grades and administered a postcourse survey that gauged student scientific self-efficacy and salience of gender identity. We found that men participated more than expected based on the class composition in most participation categories. In particular, men were strongly overrepresented in voluntary responses after small-group discussions across both semesters. Women in the course reported lower scientific self-efficacy and greater salience of gender identity. Our results suggest that active learning in itself is not a panacea for STEM equity; rather, to maximize the benefits of active-learning pedagogy, instructors should make a concerted effort to use teaching strategies that are inclusive and encourage equitable participation by all students.
| S-EPMC8697656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMinimising the effects of unconscious bias in selection for clinical academic training is essential to ensure that allocation of training posts is based on merit. We looked at the effect of anonymising applications to a training programme for junior doctors on the scores of the applications and on gender balance; and whether female candidates were more likely to seek gender-concordant mentors.MethodsApplications to the training programme were reviewed and scored independently by reviewers who received either an anonymised or named copy. Scores were compared using a paired t-test, and differences in scores compared by gender. The gender of named supervisors for male and female candidates was compared.ResultsScores of 101 applications were reviewed. When their identity was known, male candidates scored 1.72% higher and female candidates scored 0.74% higher, but these findings were not statistically significant (p value = 0.279 and 0.579). Following introduction of anonymisation, the proportion of successful female candidates increased from 27 to 46%. Female candidates were more likely to name a female supervisor compared to male (41% vs. 25% of supervisors).ConclusionsAnonymising applications did not significantly change scores, although gender balance improved. Gender-concordant mentoring initiatives should consider effects on mentors as well as mentees.
| S-EPMC10152728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionParticipant characteristics are known to affect group discourse and discussion outcomes. In medicine, many decisions are made by group consensus, therefore an understanding of these factors is highly relevant. We aimed to measure the effects of participant characteristics on tumor board discussions.MethodsWe performed a prospective, multi-institution, quantitative study of multi-disciplinary virtual tumor board meetings. Participant characteristics included age, gender, and clinical discipline. Outcomes of interest were speech events, duration, and discourse style. Participant impressions was assessed by a post-hoc survey.ResultsA total of 361 cases were discussed across 32 virtual meetings. Of the 283 attendees, 66.4 % were women, and all moderators were men. Women comprised 43 % of the 54 speakers, thus speaking less than male attendees (p < 0.001). No significant differences were detected in the duration or style of speech between men and women. Women participants commented more frequently on cases where the clinical attending was a woman (4.09 comments by women vs. 2.99 comments by men, p < 0.001), and less frequently when the attending was a man (2.48 comments by women vs. 3.20 comments by men, p < 0.001). On post hoc survey, men responded that they introduced ideas, guided discussions, and succeeded in influencing decisions significantly more than women reported that they did.ConclusionWomen physicians were underrepresented in tumor boards as moderators, speakers, and attendings of record. Women physicians commented less on men physicians' patients. Women felt less impactful than their men counterparts, despite having the same duration and style of speech. Prompted participation, moderator feedback, talking points, and limiting the number of cases can be used to balance representation in discussions.
| S-EPMC10517280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceGender-based disparities in compensation in academic medicine are recognized, but their estimated impacts on early career earning potential and strategies to mitigate them have not been well studied.ObjectivesTo compare earning potential between female and male academic physicians in the first 10 years of posttraining employment and to evaluate the estimated impact of promotion timing, starting salary, and salary growth rate on earning potential.Design, setting, and participantsUsing publicly available mean debt and compensation data for full-time employed academic physicians in the US from 2019 to 2020, starting salary, salary in year 10 of employment, annual salary growth rate, and overall earning potential in the first 10 years of employment were estimated for each gender by subspecialty. The estimated impacts of promotion timing and potential interventions, including equalizing starting salaries and annual salary growth rates, were modeled. Data analysis was performed from March to May 2021.ExposuresGender and subspecialty.Main outcomes and measuresStarting salary, annual salary growth rate, year-10 salary, and earning potential in first 10 years of employment.ResultsThis cross-sectional study included compensation data from 24 593 female and 29 886 male academic physicians across 45 subspecialties. Women had lower starting salaries in 42 of 45 subspecialties (93%), year-10 salaries in 43 of 45 subspecialties (96%), mean annual salary growth rates in 22 of 45 subspecialties (49%), and earning potential in 43 of 45 subspecialties (96%) (median [IQR], $214 440 [$130 423-$384 954], or 10%, less). A 1-year delay in promotion from assistant to associate professor reduced women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $26 042 ($19 672-$35 671), but failure to be promoted at all reduced it by a median (IQR) of $218 724 ($176 317-$284 466). Equalizing starting salaries could increase women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $250 075 ($161 299-$381 799) in the subspecialties for which starting salaries for women were lower than those for men. Equalizing annual salary growth rates could increase women's earning potential by a median (IQR) of $53 661 ($24 258-$102 892) in the subspecialties for which mean annual salary growth rates were lower for women than for men.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this study suggest that gender-based disparities in starting salary and early career earning potential are pervasive in academic medicine in the US. Equalizing starting salaries would address the majority of the differences in earning potential.
| S-EPMC8857688 | biostudies-literature
Project description:From its genesis in the Victorian era as an activity for the elite to today's emphasis on "Big Data" and continuous monitoring, natural history has a prominent role in scientific discoveries for many fields. However, participation in field expeditions is limited by funding, space, accessibility, and safety constraints. Others have detailed the active exclusion of minoritized groups from field expeditions and harm/discrimination faced by the few who do participate, but we provide one solution to broaden opportunities for participation in natural history: Virtual Expeditions. Virtual Expeditions are broadly defined as open source, web-facilitated research activities designed to analyze bulk-collected digital data from field expeditions that require visual human interpretation. We show two examples here of their use: an independent research-based analysis of snake behavior and a course-based identification of invertebrate species. We present a guide to their appropriate design, facilitation, and evaluation to result in research grade data. We highlight the importance of open source technology to allow for longevity in methodology and appropriate quality control measures necessary for projects that include dozens of researchers over multiple years. In this perspective, we specifically emphasize the prominent role that open source technology plays in making these experiences feasible and scalable. Even without explicit design as broadening participation endeavors, Virtual Expeditions allow for more inclusive participation of early career researchers with specific participatory limitations. Not only are Virtual Expeditions integral to the large-scale analysis necessary for field expeditions that generate impossibly enormous datasets, but they can also be effective facilitators of inclusivity in natural history research.
| S-EPMC9617212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGender inequities are documented in academic medicine. Within General Internal Medicine (GIM), there are fewer female division directors and first and last authors on publications. With gender parity in US medical school graduates and with Academic Hospital (AH) medicine being a relatively newer discipline, one might postulate that AH would have less gender inequity.DesignA national survey of AH programs was developed via literature review and expert recommendations. Domains included program and faculty information. Gender of the leader was determined via website or telephone call.ParticipantsLeaders of AH programs associated with the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC). Programs without a primary teaching hospital or hospitalist program and those not staffed by university-affiliated physicians were excluded.Main measuresDescription and characteristics of leaders and programs including a multivariable analysis of gender of hospitalist leaders and the portion of female faculty.Key results59% response rate (80 of 135); there were no differences between responders/non-responders in NIH funding (p = 0.12), type of institution (p = 0.09), geographic region (p = 0.15), or year established (p = 0.86). Reported number of female and male faculty were approximately equal. 80% of hospitalist leaders were male; 37% of male hospitalist leaders were professors, no female leaders were professors. In univariate and multivariate analysis only the number of hospitals staffed was a significant predictor of having a female hospitalist leader. There were no significant predictors of having fewer female faculty.ConclusionThis study demonstrated gender inequality in academic hospital medicine regarding leadership and rank. Though there was equal gender distribution of faculty, among leaders most were men and all "full professors" were men. As diversity benefits the tripartite mission research on methods, initiatives and programs that achieve gender equity in leadership are needed.
| S-EPMC7280439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies of gender inequities in academic medicine suggest the negative impact of men's networking practices, but little is known about how they shape faculty experiences.MethodsIn this qualitative study, in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 52 women and 52 men academic medicine faculty members at 16 institutions across the US in 2019. Interviews explored participants' experiences and perceptions of gender inequities in academic medicine, including perceptions of men's networking practices. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim, and transcripts were analyzed using a mixture of deductively and inductively generated codes.FindingsQualitative analysis of interview transcripts identified different dominant themes: (1) Women were often excluded from networking activities dominated by men, (2) Both women and men referred to men's networking practices in academic medicine, and believed they conferred benefits to members and excluded non-members from such benefits, (3) Participation in such networking activities yielded professional advantages, (4) Women made efforts to counteract their exclusion yet identified limits of those efforts.InterpretationThe data suggests that gender inequities in academic medicine might be associated with professional interactions that occur outside of the scope of professional work practices and in formal work sites. Additional research is needed to better understand practices such as informal networking activities and their impact in order to promote gender equity.
| S-EPMC8921538 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The present study examines a group of secondary teachers' and parents' appraisals of gender gaps in secondary students' self-assessment of competence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and non-STEM domains. Eight focus groups with 39 parents and 34 secondary teachers were conducted for this purpose. In light of the observed gender gaps in students' performance and self-perception of ability in the different subject areas, the participants were particularly surprised by girls' underestimation of their abilities in STEM subjects, compared with boys' tendency to overestimate their abilities in STEM. Most participants agreed on the need for measures to combat these inaccuracies and discussed possible causes. Some participants associated these gender disparities in students' self-assessment of ability with gender gaps in their choices of subject areas and occupations. The role played by school, teachers, families, and other socialization agents in reinforcing gender stereotypes about academic competence was also discussed in most of the focus groups. Interestingly, some teachers questioned why gender attainments obtained in schools do not serve as an example when it comes to neutralizing the sexism and gender inequality messages offered by the media and society. Likewise, technology teachers proposed changes in school practices to close gender gaps in certain areas (i.e., boys' appropriation of the playground, or the reproduction of gender roles in the classroom). Few parents acknowledged their unconscious reproduction of gender roles and stereotypes in raising their children.
| S-EPMC7545902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionInternational placements challenge students to find the right level of participation, as local practices, language and time pressure may affect their engagement in patient-related tasks or team activities. This study sought to unpack the initiation process during international clinical placements with the ultimate aim to achieve active student participation.MethodsFollowing a constructivist grounded theory approach, we conducted two individual interviews with 15 undergraduate healthcare students (before departure and whilst on placement). To identify emerging themes, we applied an iterative process of data collection and constant comparative analysis. Several team discussions informed further analysis, allowing us to reach a more conceptual level of theory.ResultsFrom our findings we constructed a four-phase model of healthcare students' initiation of international clinical placements, which brings into focus how the phases of 'orientation', 'adjustment' and 'contribution to patient care' build up towards a 'sense of belonging'. We identified several factors that induced active student participation in practice, such as a favourable workplace setting, opportunities for learning and a local support network.DiscussionActive student participation is aimed at different goals, depending on the four phases of initiation that eventually lead to a sense of belonging and support workplace learning.
| S-EPMC7012961 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMentoring is frequently suggested as an intervention to address gender inequalities in the workplace.ObjectivesTo systematically review evidence published since a definitive review in 2006 on the effectiveness of mentoring interventions aimed at achieving gender equality in academic medicine.DesignSystematic Review, using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication as a template for data extraction and synthesis.SampleStudies were included if they described a specific mentoring intervention in a medical school or analogous academic healthcare organisation and included results from an evaluation of the intervention.Eligibility criteriaMentoring was defined as (1) a formally organised intervention entailing a supportive relationship between a mentor, defined as a more senior/experienced person and a mentee defined as a more junior/inexperienced person; (2) mentoring intervention involved academic career support (3) the mentoring relationship was outside line management or supervision of performance and was defined by contact over an extended period of time.OutcomesThe impact of mentoring was usually reported at the level of individual participants, for example, satisfaction and well-being or self-reported career progression. We sought evidence of impact on gender equality via reports of organisation-level effectiveness, of promotion or retention, pay and academic performance of female staff.ResultsWe identified 32 publications: 8 review articles, 20 primary observational studies and 4 randomised controlled trials. A further 19 discussed mentoring in relation to gender but did not meet our eligibility criteria. The terminology used, and the structures and processes reported as constituting mentoring, varied greatly. We identified that mentoring is popular with many who receive it; however, we found no robust evidence of effectiveness in reducing gender inequalities. Primary research used weak evaluation designs.ConclusionsMentoring is a complex intervention. Future evaluations should adopt standardised approaches used in applied health research to the design and evaluation of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
| S-EPMC7839843 | biostudies-literature