Dear Editor,
We read with interest the article by Morgan (2019) analysing the use of seminars in undergraduate nurse education. As medical students at Imperial College London, we found that there were many parallels that could be drawn between this style of education for nursing students and the various interactive learning techniques that are implemented in our curriculum.
During our pre-clinical years, we received teaching in didactic forms such as large group lectures, as well as small group tutorials and problem-based learning (PBL) seminars. PBL seminars were similar to those described by Morgan (2019), the main difference being that the sessions were structured around clinical scenarios, with students working through learning objectives together, guided by a facilitator. However, Morgan's seminars were more focused around the application of the 6Cs in nursing practice.
Morgan (2019) describes the values of discussion-based learning, constructive alignment, and developing teamwork and presenting skills, all of which were also covered during our PBL sessions. We found this style of training extremely useful when we entered our clinical years and were able to apply these skills to ward-based learning.
Specific examples of how this training benefited us included increasing our confidence in case presentations to seniors, improving our ability to discuss problems with other members of the multidisciplinary team and improving skills in self-directed learning and wider reading around certain topics.
Although we found this teaching very useful, seminars did not continue throughout our clinical years, which meant that these skills were often not developed or lost. There would be advantages in honing these skills further and encouraging continuing self-directed learning throughout medical careers. It is also important to note that first-hand clinical experience impacts learners and therefore affects the outcome of these sessions (Spencer, 2003). This style of education is not being used to its full potential if it is only used during the early years of undergraduate courses. One way to counter this would be for these seminars to be held throughout the clinical experiences, as well as continuing in postgraduate learning.
Another important difference between the PBL sessions and the seminars described by Morgan (2019) is the style of teaching. During PBL sessions the teacher acted as a guide, while the majority of learning occurred with medical students working through cases together, supplemented by online research undertaken before and after sessions. This meant students are learning more actively in a constructivist style, building on their prior knowledge and making links between old and new knowledge (Bruning et al, 2004). We believe that, if this were incorporated into seminars, it would equip nursing students with a more robust understanding of the subject, as well as greater ability to learn when working alone. Practically, this could be done by allowing the students to direct the seminars themselves during the discussion portion of the session and encouraging more self-study outside of the sessions.
It is imperative for patient outcomes that both nursing and medical students have effective teamwork, discussion and self-directed learning skills. Evidence shows that these interactive teaching sessions are highly effective ways of developing these (Kaufman and Mann, 2010) and so continual assessment and improvement of these methods will enhance the skill of future NHS nurses and doctors.