Skip to main content
Log in

Successful lecturing

A prospective study to validate attributes of the effective medical lecture

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In a study conducted over 3 large symposia on intensive review of internal medicine, we previously assessed the features that were most important to course participants in evaluating the quality of a lecture. In this study, we attempt to validate these observations by assessing prospectively the extent to which ratings of specific lecture features would predict the overall evaluation of lectures.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After each lecture, 143 to 355 course participants rated the overall lecture quality of 69 speakers involved in a large symposium on intensive review of internal medicine. In addition, 7 selected participants and the course directors rated specific lecture features and overall quality for each speaker. The relations among the variables were assessed through Pearson correlation coefficients and cluster analysis. Regression analysis was performed to determine which features would predict the overall lecture quality ratings. The features that most highly correlated with ratings of overall lecture quality were the speaker’s abilities to identify key points (r=.797) and be engaging (r=.782), the lecture clarity (r=.754), and the slide comprehensibility (r=.691) and format (r=.660). The three lecture features of engaging the audience, lecture clarity, and using a case-based format were identified through regression as the strongest predictors of overall lecture quality ratings (R 2=0.67, P=0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS: We have identified core lecture features that positively affect the success of the lecture. We believe our findings are useful for lecturers wanting to improve their effectiveness and for educators who design continuing medical education curricula.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Copeland HL, Stoller JK, Hewson MG, Longworth DL. Making the continuing medical education lecture effective. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 1998;18:227–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Brennan RL. Elements of Generalizability Theory. Iowa City, Iowa: ACT Publications; 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Saroyan A, Snell LS. Variations in lecturing styles. Higher Educ. 1997;33:85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Irby D, DeMers J, Scher M, Matthews D. A model for the improvement of medical faculty lecturing. J Med Educ. 1976;51:403–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Pritchard RD, Watson MD, Kelly K, Paquin AR. Searching for the ideal: a review of teaching evaluation literature. In: Helping Teachers Teach Well. San Francisco, Calif: The New Lexington Press; 1998:3–42.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gagnon RJ, Thivierge R. Evaluating touch pad technology. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 1997;17:20–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Centra JA. Reflective Faculty Evaluation: Enhancing Teaching and Determining Faculty Effectiveness. San Francisco, Calif: Jossey-Bass; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hewson MG. Clinical teaching in the ambulatory setting. J Gen Intern Med. 1992;7:76–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Brown G, Bakhtar M, Youngman M. Toward a typology of lecturing styles. Br J Psychol. 1984;54:93–100.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David L. Longworth MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Copeland, H.L., Longworth, D.L., Hewson, M.G. et al. Successful lecturing. J GEN INTERN MED 15, 366–371 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.06439.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.06439.x

Key words

Navigation