Teaching Medical Students to Reflect More Deeply

Problem: Although many studies have examined the importance of reflective writing in medical education, there is a scarcity of evidence for any particular intervention to improve the quality of reflection among medical students. Historically, students on our Internal Medicine clerkship were given a written reflection assignment without explanation of critical reflection. To facilitate the development of deeper reflection, a new curriculum was introduced. Intervention: A 90-minute workshop on critical reflection was introduced at the start of the Internal Medicine rotation. Key components included a video clip stimulating reflection, small- and large-group exercises, and a faculty member's personal reflection. Students were then asked to write two reflection papers. To minimize bias, the names and dates were removed from each reflection paper and combined with reflection papers from a historical control group. Four faculty used a previously validated tool, the REFLECT rubric, to independently grade the written reflection papers as nonreflective (as a 1), thoughtful action (2), reflection (3), or critical reflection (4). The final grade of each paper was determined by consensus among the graders. Context: The 90-minute workshop was given once at the beginning of each 10-week requisite Internal Medicine clerkship to 3rd-year medical students. Outcome: One hundred fifty-five papers written after the workshop were compared to 155 papers from a preworkshop historical control group. The primary analysis showed the number of students writing critical reflection papers increased after the educational intervention, from 14% to 47% (p = .0002). The effect size using Cohen's d was 0.62. The kappa statistic used to measure interrater reliability among the four graders was 0.37. Lessons Learned: Through a 90-minute reflection workshop more 3rd-year students were able to demonstrate the potential for critical reflection compared to previous students not exposed to this teaching. Strengths include the large sample size of written reflection papers submitted throughout an entire academic year and blinded grading of papers that minimized bias. The low interrater reliability is a limitation. We believe this curriculum could readily be adapted to a clerkship seeking to enhance learner reflection.