Location
Suwanee, GA
Start Date
11-5-2023 1:00 PM
End Date
11-5-2023 4:00 PM
Description
Objective: Effective communication is a characteristic that is required of clinicians but is difficult to teach. Students were challenged in their communication practices by placing them into non-complimentary communication style groups to help develop more effective, professional communication.
Methods: Students were given a communication social style test (i.e., "SELF profile") that divided individuals into one of 4 categories (S, E, L, and F) to help them identify how they best relate to others. The test rates individuals' responses in levels of introversion versus extroversion and task versus relationship communication preferences. Results from the profile were used to place students in teams that would maximally challenge their ability to work together.
Groups were required to work together on quizzes, assignments, tests, papers, presentations, or clinical cases. The groups remained the same during the 2 courses (Neuroscience and Adult Neuro Rehab). These classes met twice weekly for 16 weeks from 8 AM-12 PM and 1-3 PM. Both classes consisted of the same students and faculty instructors.
Faculty continuously evaluated team communication throughout the course to test for communication issues. The instructors noted any conflict (team or student) in a daily log. Student feedback on communication competencies was collected during weeks 10 and 16 of the course.
Results: The student population showed an uneven distribution of communication styles (S: 47%; E: 7%; L: 24%; F: 22%). Teams were distributed into three groups of E/F, eight groups of E/L, and one control group of S/F.
All teams acknowledged that they had some form of communication challenges throughout the courses and that these challenges were more prominent than they had experienced in other courses. However, 93% of the students reported that their ability to communicate over the semester grew and believed that the experience would assist them as future clinicians.
Problems observed consisted of: failure to listen (63%), individuals trying to dominate the conversation (17%), individuals not speaking (i.e., shy; 3%), holding a grudge (3%), being overly critical of others (3%), and problems with division of work (10%). Within teams, most of the students (71%) indicated that they solved their issues by listening to their classmates and talking about differences of opinion.
Several students (5%) said that many of their issues stemmed from students working at different paces. These groups indicated that they solved the dilemma by asking whether everyone in the group was ready to talk about the answers before starting conversations.
Our results suggest that placing students in teams designed to challenge their communication style may be helpful for the development of professional communication competency in professional curriculums. While communication was not the focus of the courses, these exercises helped students practice and grow from each other in both their awareness of different communication styles and their adaptability to disparate styles in others.
Embargo Period
8-29-2023
Included in
Say that again? Student growth in communication through conflict management
Suwanee, GA
Objective: Effective communication is a characteristic that is required of clinicians but is difficult to teach. Students were challenged in their communication practices by placing them into non-complimentary communication style groups to help develop more effective, professional communication.
Methods: Students were given a communication social style test (i.e., "SELF profile") that divided individuals into one of 4 categories (S, E, L, and F) to help them identify how they best relate to others. The test rates individuals' responses in levels of introversion versus extroversion and task versus relationship communication preferences. Results from the profile were used to place students in teams that would maximally challenge their ability to work together.
Groups were required to work together on quizzes, assignments, tests, papers, presentations, or clinical cases. The groups remained the same during the 2 courses (Neuroscience and Adult Neuro Rehab). These classes met twice weekly for 16 weeks from 8 AM-12 PM and 1-3 PM. Both classes consisted of the same students and faculty instructors.
Faculty continuously evaluated team communication throughout the course to test for communication issues. The instructors noted any conflict (team or student) in a daily log. Student feedback on communication competencies was collected during weeks 10 and 16 of the course.
Results: The student population showed an uneven distribution of communication styles (S: 47%; E: 7%; L: 24%; F: 22%). Teams were distributed into three groups of E/F, eight groups of E/L, and one control group of S/F.
All teams acknowledged that they had some form of communication challenges throughout the courses and that these challenges were more prominent than they had experienced in other courses. However, 93% of the students reported that their ability to communicate over the semester grew and believed that the experience would assist them as future clinicians.
Problems observed consisted of: failure to listen (63%), individuals trying to dominate the conversation (17%), individuals not speaking (i.e., shy; 3%), holding a grudge (3%), being overly critical of others (3%), and problems with division of work (10%). Within teams, most of the students (71%) indicated that they solved their issues by listening to their classmates and talking about differences of opinion.
Several students (5%) said that many of their issues stemmed from students working at different paces. These groups indicated that they solved the dilemma by asking whether everyone in the group was ready to talk about the answers before starting conversations.
Our results suggest that placing students in teams designed to challenge their communication style may be helpful for the development of professional communication competency in professional curriculums. While communication was not the focus of the courses, these exercises helped students practice and grow from each other in both their awareness of different communication styles and their adaptability to disparate styles in others.