Display options
Cite
Monteiro S, Sibbald M. Aha! Taking on the myth that simulation-derived surprise enhances learning. Med Educ. 2020;54(6):510-516doi: 10.1111/medu.14141.
Monteiro, S., & Sibbald, M. (2020). Aha! Taking on the myth that simulation-derived surprise enhances learning. Medical education, 54(6), 510-516. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14141
Monteiro, Sandra, and Sibbald, Matthew. "Aha! Taking on the myth that simulation-derived surprise enhances learning." Medical education vol. 54,6 (2020): 510-516. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.14141
Monteiro S, Sibbald M. Aha! Taking on the myth that simulation-derived surprise enhances learning. Med Educ. 2020 Jun;54(6):510-516. doi: 10.1111/medu.14141. Epub 2020 Apr 16. PMID: 32096233.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Med Educ. 2020 Jun;54(6):510-516. doi: 10.1111/medu.14141. Epub 2020 Apr 16.

Aha! Taking on the myth that simulation-derived surprise enhances learning.

Medical education

Sandra Monteiro, Matthew Sibbald

Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
  2. Department of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

PMID: 32096233 DOI: 10.1111/medu.14141

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to discuss the recurring education-related issue of the high-fidelity simulation myth. In the current instantiation, educators erroneously believe that trainees benefit from authentic uncertainty and surprise in simulation-based training.

METHODS: We explore the origins of this myth within the experiential learning and social constructivism theories and propose an evidence-based solution of transparent and guided instruction in simulation.

RESULTS: Constructivist theories highlight meaning making as the benefit of inquiry and discovery learning strategies. Inappropriate translation of this epistemology into an element of curriculum design creates unfortunate unintended consequences.

CONCLUSIONS: We propose that the translation of constructivist theories of learning within simulation-based education has resulted in a pervasive myth, which decrees that scenarios must introduce realistic tension or surprises to encourage exploration and insightful problem solving. We argue that this myth is masquerading as experiential learning. In this narrative review, we interpret our experiences and observations of simulation-based education through our expertise in education science and curriculum design. We offer anecdotal evidence along with a review of selected literature to establish the presence of this previously undetected myth.

© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd and The Association for the Study of Medical Education.

References

  1. Graham AC, McAleer S. An overview of realist evaluation for simulation-based education. Adv Simul. 2018;3(1):13. - PubMed
  2. Ziv A, Ben-David S, Ziv M. Simulation based medical education: an opportunity to learn from errors. Med Teach. 2005;27(3):193-199. - PubMed
  3. Cook DA, Hatala R, Brydges R, et al. Technology-enhanced simulation for health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2011;306(9):978-988. - PubMed
  4. Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, Hatala R, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training. Acad Med. 2014;89(3):387-392. - PubMed
  5. Norman G, Dore K, Grierson L. The minimal relationship between simulation fidelity and transfer of learning. Med Educ. 2012;46(7):636-647. - PubMed
  6. Cook DA, Hamstra SJ, Brydges R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of instructional design features in simulation-based education: systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Teach. 2013;35(1):e867-e898. - PubMed
  7. Cook DA, Brydges R, Zendejas B, Hamstra SJ, Hatala R. Mastery learning for health professionals using technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2013;88(8):1178-1186. - PubMed
  8. Roberts D, Greene L. The theatre of high-fidelity simulation education. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):694-698. - PubMed
  9. Bland AJ, Topping A, Tobbell J. Time to unravel the conceptual confusion of authenticity and fidelity and their contribution to learning within simulation-based nurse education. A discussion paper. Nurse Educ Today. 2014;34(7):1112-1118. - PubMed
  10. Bland AJ, Topping A, Wood B. A concept analysis of simulation as a learning strategy in the education of undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today. 2011;31(7):664-670. - PubMed
  11. Rudolph JW, Simon R, Raemer DB. Which reality matters? Questions on the path to high engagement in healthcare simulation. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):161-163. - PubMed
  12. Eppich W, Cheng A. Promoting Excellence and Reflective Learning in Simulation (PEARLS): development and rationale for a blended approach to health care simulation debriefing. Simul Healthc. 2015;10(2):106-115. - PubMed
  13. Eppich WJ, Hunt EA, Duval-Arnould JM, Siddall VJ, Cheng A. Structuring feedback and debriefing to achieve mastery learning goals. Acad Med. 2015;90(11):1501-1518. - PubMed
  14. Sawyer T, Eppich W, Brett-Fleegler M, Grant V, Cheng A. More than one way to debrief: a critical review of healthcare simulation debriefing methods. Simul Healthc. 2016;11(3):209-217. - PubMed
  15. Chmil JV. Prebriefing in simulation-based learning experiences. Nurse Educ. 2016;41(2):64-65. - PubMed
  16. Rudolph JW, Raemer DB, Simon R. Establishing a safe container for learning in simulation: the role of the presimulation briefing. Simul Healthc. 2014;9(6):339-349. - PubMed
  17. Page-Cutrara K. Use of prebriefing in nursing simulation: a literature review. J Nurs Educ. 2014;53(3):136-141. - PubMed
  18. Cheng A, Eppich W, Grant V, Sherbino J, Zendejas B, Cook DA. Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ. 2014;48(7):657-666. - PubMed
  19. Kneebone R, Arora S, King D, et al. Distributed simulation - accessible immersive training. Med Teach. 2010;32(1):65-70. - PubMed
  20. Kneebone R, Nestel D, Vincent C, Darzi A. Complexity, risk and simulation in learning procedural skills. Med Educ. 2007;41(8):808-814. - PubMed
  21. DeMaria S Jr, Levine AI. The use of stress to enrich the simulated environment. In: Levine AI, DeMaria Jr S, Schwartz AD, Sim AJ, eds. The Comprehensive Textbook of Healthcare Simulation. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013:65-72. - PubMed
  22. DeMaria S Jr, Bryson EO, Mooney TJ, et al. Adding emotional stressors to training in simulated cardiopulmonary arrest enhances participant performance. Med Educ. 2010;44(10):1006-1015. - PubMed
  23. Macdougall L, Martin R, McCallum I, Grogan E. Simulation and stress: acceptable to students and not confidence-busting. Clin Teach. 2013;10(1):38-41. - PubMed
  24. Friedman Z, Siddiqui N, Katznelson R, Devito I, Davies S. Experience is not enough: repeated breaches in epidural anesthesia aseptic technique by novice operators despite improved skill. Anesthesiology. 2008;108(5):914-920. - PubMed
  25. LeBlanc VR, McConnell MM, Monteiro SD. Predictable chaos: a review of the effects of emotions on attention, memory and decision making. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2015;20(1):265-282. - PubMed
  26. LeBlanc VR. The effects of acute stress on performance: implications for health professions education. Acad Med. 2009;84(Suppl 10):S25-S33. - PubMed
  27. LeBlanc VR, MacDonald RD, McArthur B, King K, Lepine T. Paramedic performance in calculating drug dosages following stressful scenarios in a human patient simulator. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2005;9(4):439-444. - PubMed
  28. Regehr C, LeBlanc VR. PTSD, acute stress, performance and decision-making in emergency service workers. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2017;45(2):184-192. - PubMed
  29. Schwabe L, Wolf OT. Learning under stress impairs memory formation. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2010;93(2):183-188. - PubMed
  30. Elstein AS, Shulman LS, Sprafka SA. Medical problem solving: a ten-year retrospective. Eval Health Profess. 1990;13(1):5-36. - PubMed
  31. Colliver JA, Markwell SJ, Vu NV, Barrows HS. Case specificity of standardized-patient examinations: consistency of performance on components of clinical competence within and between cases. Eval Health Profess. 1990;13(2):252-261. - PubMed
  32. Eva KW. On the generality of specificity. Med Educ. 2003;37(7):587-588. - PubMed
  33. Norman G, Bordage G, Page G, Keane D. How specific is case specificity? Med Educ. 2006;40(7):618-623. - PubMed
  34. Andreatta PB, Hillard M, Krain LP. The impact of stress factors in simulation-based laparoscopic training. Surgery. 2010;147(5):631-639. - PubMed
  35. Bäumler G. On the validity of the Yerkes-Dodson law. Studia Psychol. 1994;36(3):205. - PubMed
  36. Chaby LE, Sheriff MJ, Hirrlinger AM, Braithwaite VA. Can we understand how developmental stress enhances performance under future threat with the Yerkes-Dodson law? Commun Integr Biol. 2015;8(3):e1029689. - PubMed
  37. Corbett M. From law to folklore: work stress and the Yerkes-Dodson Law. J Manag Psychol. 2015;30(6):741-752. - PubMed
  38. Teigen KH. Yerkes-Dodson: a law for all seasons. Theory Psychol. 1994;4(4):525-547. - PubMed
  39. Blazeck A. Simulation anxiety syndrome: presentation and treatment. Clin Simul Nurs. 2011;7(2):e57-e60. - PubMed
  40. Elzinga BM, Roelofs K. Cortisol-induced impairments of working memory require acute sympathetic activation. Behav Neurosci. 2005;119(1):98-103. - PubMed
  41. Joëls M, Pu Z, Wiegert O, Oitzl MS, Krugers HJ. Learning under stress: how does it work? Trends Cognit Sci. 2006;10(4):152-158. - PubMed
  42. Schwabe L, Joëls M, Roozendaal B, Wolf OT, Oitzl MS. Stress effects on memory: an update and integration. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012;36(7):1740-1749. - PubMed
  43. Fraser K, Ma I, Teteris E, Baxter H, Wright B, McLaughlin K. Emotion, cognitive load and learning outcomes during simulation training. Med Educ. 2012;46(11):1055-1062. - PubMed
  44. Haji FA, Cheung JJH, Woods N, Regehr G, de Ribaupierre S, Dubrowski A. Thrive or overload? The effect of task complexity on novices’ simulation-based learning. Med Educ. 2016;50(9):955-968. - PubMed
  45. Yardley S, Teunissen PW, Dornan T. Experiential learning: AMEE Guide No. 63. Med Teach. 2012;1(34):e102-e115. - PubMed
  46. Gosenpud J, Miesing P. The relative influence of several factors on simulation performance. Simul Gaming. 1992;23(3):311-325. - PubMed
  47. Dunlosky J, Rawson KA. Overconfidence produces underachievement: inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learn Instr. 2012;22(4):271-280. - PubMed
  48. Kusurkar RA, ten Cate TJ, van Asperen M, Croiset G. Motivation as an independent and a dependent variable in medical education: a review of the literature. Med Teach. 2011;33(5):e242-e262. - PubMed
  49. De Bruin ABHDJ, Cavalcanti RB. Monitoring and regulation of learning in medical education: the need for predictive cue. Med Educ. 2017;51(6):575-584. - PubMed
  50. De Bruin AB, Sibbald M, Monteiro S. The science of learning. In: Swanwick T, Forrest K, O’Brien BC, eds. Understanding Medical Education: Evidence, Theory and Practice, 3rd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2018:23-36. - PubMed
  51. Tuovinen JE, Sweller J. A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. J Educ Psychol. 1999;91(2):334-341. - PubMed
  52. Jonassen DH, Rohrer-Murphy L. Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educ Technol Res Dev. 1999;47(1):61-79. - PubMed
  53. Alfieri L, Brooks PJ, Aldrich NJ, Tenenbaum HR. Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? J Educ Psychol. 2011;103(1):1-18. - PubMed
  54. Lewis LH, Williams CJ. Experiential learning: past and present. New Dir Adult Contin Educ. 1994;1994(62):5-16. - PubMed
  55. Mayer RE. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. Am Psychol. 2004;59(1):14-19. - PubMed
  56. Colliver J. Constructivism: the view of knowledge that ended philosophy or a theory of learning and instruction? Teach Learn Med. 2009;1(14):49-51. - PubMed
  57. Munby H, Russell T. Educating the reflective teacher: an essay review of two books by Donald Schön. J Curric Stud. 1989;21(1):71-80. - PubMed
  58. Maudsley G, Strivens J. Promoting professional knowledge, experiential learning and critical thinking for medical students. Med Educ. 2000;34(7):535-544. - PubMed
  59. Eva KW. Diagnostic error in medical education: where wrongs can make right. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009;14 (Suppl 1):S71-S81. - PubMed
  60. Domuracki K, Wong A, Olivieri L, Grierson LE. The impacts of observing flawed and flawless demonstrations on clinical skill learning. Med Educ. 2015;49(2):186-192. - PubMed
  61. Kirschner PA, Sweller J, Clark RE. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ Psychol. 2006;41(2):75-86. - PubMed
  62. Harden RH. Learning outcomes and instructional objectives: is there a difference? Med Teach. 2002;24(2):151-155. - PubMed
  63. Wang X, Su Y, Cheung S, Wong E, Kwong T. An exploration of Biggs’ constructive alignment in course design and its impact on students’ learning approaches. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 2013;38(4):477-491. - PubMed
  64. Lurie S. Towards greater clarity in the role of ambiguity in clinical reasoning. Med Educ. 2011;45(4):326-328. - PubMed
  65. Charlin B, Gagnon R, Pelletier J, et al. Assessment of clinical reasoning in the context of uncertainty: the effect of variability within the reference panel. Med Educ. 2006;40(9):848-854. - PubMed
  66. Blanco MA, Capello CF, Dorsch JL, Perry GJ, Zanetti ML. A survey study of evidence-based medicine training in US and Canadian medical schools. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102(3):160-168. - PubMed
  67. Issenberg S, McGaghie WC, Petrusa ER, Lee Gordon D, Scalese RJ. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10-28. - PubMed
  68. Dieckmann P, Gaba D, Rall M. Deepening the theoretical foundations of patient simulation as social practice. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(3):183-193. - PubMed
  69. Lunney M. Development of written case studies as simulations of diagnosis in nursing. Int J Nurs Terminol Classif. 1992;3(1):23-29. - PubMed
  70. Ilgen JS, Bowen JL, Yarris LM, Fu R, Lowe RA, Eva K. Adjusting our lens: can developmental differences in diagnostic reasoning be harnessed to improve health professional and trainee assessment? Acad Emerg Med. 2011;18(Suppl 2):S79-S86. - PubMed
  71. Monteiro SD, Sherbino J, Schmidt H, Mamede S, Ilgen J, Norman G. It’s the destination: diagnostic accuracy and reasoning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2020;25(1):19-29. - PubMed
  72. Weurlander M, Söderberg M, Scheja M, Hult H, Wernerson A. Exploring formative assessment as a tool for learning: students’ experiences of different methods of formative assessment. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 2012;37(6):747-760. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types