Category: Building Community

BMERG Committee Profile

Posted on by andrew.bond

Dr Ed Luff, BSc, MB ChB, PG Dip, MAcadMEd, MRCEM

In the second of our BMERG Committee profiles, we asked Ed Luff to tell us a bit about himself.

Ed is a Bristol Medical School graduate, working as a Clinical Lecturer at Bristol Medical School and a Speciality Teaching Fellow and Tutor at South Bristol Academy, based in the Bristol Royal Infirmary.

He is currently finishing his MSc dissertation exploring students’ experiences and perceptions of using simulation to teach human factors and non-technical skills, as part of his studies on the Health Professionals Education (TLHP) course.

What was your first role or job as an educator?

When I was a medical student at Bristol, I was involved with a peer teaching scheme, educating other healthcare students, including pharmacy and nursing students, and in my later clinical years I also helped to mentor and teach more junior medical students on placements. I then went on to mentor final-year students placed on the same wards as me when I was working as a Foundation Doctor, as well as helping to teach in tutorials and at the bedside.

My first formal role was working as a Clinical Teaching Fellow in Swindon, where I spent 50% of my time teaching medical students from Bristol, Oxford and Kings College London, at The Great Western Hospital, and the other half of my time working clinically in Emergency Medicine and Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

What inspired you to become an educator and/or education researcher?

I was really inspired by all of the amazing teachers and educators that I met on my journey through medical school at Bristol. This included many extremely enthusiastic and gifted Clinical Teaching Fellows, who I saw as wonderful role models. I aspired to be like them in my future career, and planned to work as a Clinical Teaching Fellow after completing my Foundation Training.

I was fortunate to get a job as a CTF, and during this, I was encouraged to pursue some small medical educational research projects, I was supported by some excellent seniors, including some more experienced CTFs, who allowed me to start exploring the world of education research. After this, I was hooked and was determined to incorporate education research into my educational career!

Alongside my CTF job, I was able to complete my PG Cert in Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals (TLHP, now HPE), which I thoroughly enjoyed. I then went on to complete the PG Dip, including a module on Research Methods, which I found fascinating. This gave me the final push to go on and complete my MSc dissertation, continuing my journey in medical education research, alongside my teaching and clinical commitments.

What challenges have you faced in your journey as a medical education researcher and how have you overcome these?

Finding time to complete research, alongside other teaching and educational responsibilities, supporting students, clinical duties, further study and everything else outside of work is always challenging. I’m currently in the process of completing my MSc dissertation, and at times, finding the motivation to sit down and do some reading, or write some words can be challenging.

Having supervisors and others to keep me motivated and working as part of a team has always really helped me. Seeking the advice, guidance and support of more experienced people is invaluable and bouncing ideas around with someone else, as well as working collaboratively, is extremely important to me. I strongly believe that research should never be conducted in isolation.

What is your current medical education research project on?

I’m currently writing my dissertation for my MSc in Health Professionals Education (previously Teaching and Learning for Health Professionals/ TLHP). I chose to explore students’ experiences and perceptions of using simulation as a method to teach human factors and non-technical skills. These are two areas that I’m really passionate about, using simulation as a teaching and learning tool, and the interplay of humans, communication, environment, and everything else that forms human factors and non-technical skills. I’m relatively new to qualitative research but I’ve thrown myself into it and am really enjoying all the new skills I’m learning along the way.

Who are your medical education/education research role models?

I’ve been privileged enough to be taught by and now work with many amazing individuals at Bristol Medical School. These include Professor Karen Forbes, Professor Andrew Blythe and Dr Sarah Allsop. All of whom have provided advice and guidance as I develop my academic and educational career. I also admire and looked up to many of my former CTFs who inspired me to apply for the roles that opened many doors to get me to where I am today.

What would you consider your greatest academic success?

Helping to support all the students I have worked with, through various challenges, to achieve their academic potential. Many of them have now graduated and started working as doctors, and some of whom I have since met as colleagues! I now also have a leadership role within the medical school assessments team, which is equally exciting as it is daunting.

Have you ever had a piece of work go wrong and how did you deal with this?

Many! Ask for help. Find someone who can support you. See if there are any solutions that you might not have thought about initially and don’t give up at the first hurdle. But also reflect on what went wrong and where things didn’t work out as expected. And know when it is a better use of your time to let this one go, learn from it and put your time into something more productive. Sometimes it’s a tricky balance to strike.

What helps you to maintain your work life balance as a medical educator/researcher?

I think this is something that I struggle with generally. My family are amazingly supportive of all of my endeavours, both work-related and outside of work. I like to set myself challenges and have completed a few triathlons, including an Ironman distance event. My 2 young sons keep me busy at home and seeing friends and family is extremely important to me and keeps me grounded. I enjoy playing hockey for a local team and try to get outside as much as possible. I think that trying to carve out time to focus on things away from work is important, and something I am trying to do more of.

What do you think will be the greatest change to medical education over the next decade?

The ever-increasing demands placed on the national health service, from all angles, is a huge challenge. I see this especially, in my clinical work as an Emergency Medicine Doctor. This will require more health professionals to be employed, meaning increases in education, both undergraduate and postgraduate, increases in student numbers, and changes in the ways we plan and deliver teaching, requiring innovation across the board, as well as more inter-professional and cross-institution collaboration.

What book are you reading at the moment?

I’m not a big reader, so I often start something and never quite finish it…but the books that I really got into were all from Atul Gawande. He captivated me and I couldn’t put them down.

What is your favourite quote?

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results” – Albert Einstein

If something doesn’t work, give it a couple of goes, but don’t keep ploughing on with it. You never know what trying something else might lead to!

What job would you do if you were not a medical educator/researcher?

I spent a season working in the French Alps before starting medical school, and then also worked as a SCUBA diving instructor. My youthful dream would be to work as a skiing instructor in the winter and teach people to SCUBA dive in the summer. Or, working as a barista in a speciality coffee shop somewhere, as my other hobby is trying to perfect making and then drinking delicious coffee.

What three top tips would you give to new medical education researchers?

  1. Research things that interest you
  2. Make contacts near and far and collaborate with others
  3. Find a supervisor and value their experience

Where is your favourite place in the world and why?

I love being in the mountains, surrounded by the beautiful scenery and the fresh mountain air. I enjoy skiing and snowboarding, as well as the hearty apline food and warm fires at the end of the day.

Getting started in pedagogical research

Posted on by andrew.bond

In this week’s blog, Dr Andy Bond reflects on how to get started in pedagogical research, especially when coming from a non-teaching background, highlighting some insights from experienced members of BMERG.

I am a scientific researcher! This is ingrained into me as it was my career for over 20 years since starting out on my PhD ‘journey’ in 2003. It therefore came as a bit of a shock to the system to become a Pathway 3 member of the teaching staff at the University of Bristol, and feel like I had left basic science research behind. Yes, there is the chance to supervise student projects and live research vicariously through them, however it isn’t quite the same as being hands on, actually doing experiments for hours on end in the lab, with varying degrees of success. As teaching staff, we are required to complete our Postgraduate Certificate in Academic Practice (PGCAP). This introduced me to pedagogy and opened my eyes to a very different way of working, thinking and writing; pedagogical research values people’s opinions just as, if not more, importantly than “hard evidence”. Having purely been in the quantitative, basic science, school of research, I found the academic papers to be written in a very different style and tone that felt very alien, and not quite right to me!! This is where the dreaded imposter syndrome starts to creep in, and that sense you’re not doing things correctly, and you don’t quite know how to get started.

Colleagues introduced me to BMERG, and in particular the Journal Club. If I’m being honest, the imposter syndrome still continued for a while, with unfamiliar terms, phrases and methodologies being common place, however as with many things, learning through immersion fosters deeper understanding. I am now finding that pedagogical research (as a branch of social science) and basic science research share many similarities – forming research questions, gathering data (quantitative or qualitative), using reasoning, analysing results, and (hopefully) publishing the findings. Ultimately, both with the aim to advance knowledge.

To gain further insight for this blog, I asked some members of BMERG for their top tips for getting started, and have tried to summarise their insights below.

Collaboration

A common theme that emerged was that collaboration is key, especially when starting out, but also for the more experienced pedagogical researcher. In the early stages, teaming up with someone with experience, ideally that shares your interests, enables you to get feedback and validation for your ideas, but also to take on more ambitious projects, and increase chances of funding. Collaboration can also give you access to a wider group of students e.g. you may teach to postgraduates, but have an idea also relevant to undergraduate students, and need collaborators to help facilitate the transition.

Plan upfront

Another key theme was planning. All projects need to be carefully planned out in advance to focus the investigation, and start with a clear aim (the simpler the better) for what you want to achieve. Knowing the focus is vital, whether looking at teaching innovation (designing new methods of teaching to help students learn) or educational research (investigating an issue or challenge discovered when teaching). Both are equally valid, but require different approaches. Engaging with the ethics process early on helps to clarify your study design, and check the data you will receive is robust and reliable. It’s much harder to start with the methodology and work backwards. To prevent unintentionally marginalizing participants, it is vital at the research design stage to put the learners first; knowing who you are researching (considering inclusivity), and modifying research practices accordingly, rather than just accepting standard methods. Caution should be exercised at all stages of the project, from planning through to interpretation and analysis of results, considering the researchers beliefs or world view (paradigm), and their positionality (acknowledging how a researcher’s identity influences their research).

Use the resources available to you

In addition to the people within your network, and communities such as BMERG with its aforementioned Journal Club, there are a number of other Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) resources available to the new pedagogical researcher within the University of Bristol, under the Bristol Institute for Learning and Teaching (BILT) umbrella (Scholarship of Teaching and Learning | Bristol Institute For Learning and Teaching | University of Bristol) e.g. Show, Tell and Talk Workshops, and the BILT Annual conference. Attending these events helps to widen your network, see what other research is taking place, helps to validate your own ideas, and gain confidence to undertake your own projects. Previous examples of published pedagogical research are an excellent resource, enabling you to see how other people structure their projects, and also their writing.

A final point suggested that has helped adjust my way of thinking, especially coming from a basic science research background, is to try to think of it not just as pedagogical research (studying something and trying to discover facts), but pedagogical insight (deep understanding). Put another way, research tells us what is happening, but we also need insight to understand why it is happening and what we can do about it. Looking at teaching practices through the insight lens can give a different perspective, and can open up alternative avenues for consideration.

So to sum up how you get started in pedagogical research, you just go for it, and you will find an extremely friendly and helpful community of like-minded people, that will support you, and help you build the confidence needed to do great things for the benefit of students. If anyone has further insights into how to get started on the pedagogical research journey then I would welcome your input via a comment below.

With thanks to Sarah Allsop, Sarah Mclaughlin, Fiona Holmes, Claire Hudson and Sally Dowling for their insights.

Author Biography

Dr Andrew Bond is a Lecturer in Cardiovascular Medicine, in Bristol Medical School, and Co-Director of MSc Cardiovascular Perfusion. In 2023 he switched to the Teaching and Scholarship Pathway at the University of Bristol, and his teaching role predominantly involves developing and delivering content on the MSc Translational Cardiovascular Medicine, MSc Clinical Perfusion Science and MSc Cardiovascular Perfusion. Andy recently joined the BMERG Committee, and sees it as the beginning of his pursuit of pedagogical research, and the chance to better understand how students learn and thrive. His hope is to integrate insights from this research into his own teaching practice, so that research and practice continually inform one another.

BMERG Committee Profile

Posted on by andrew.bond

In the first of our BMERG Committee profiles, we shine the spotlight on Fiona Holmes, our School Education Director.

Fiona is Associate Professor in Health Science Education and School Education Director. She is Programme Director of MSc Clinical Perfusion Science and Co-Director of MRes Health Sciences Research. During her long career as a neuroscientist she enjoyed combining research with teaching, aiming to inspire the next generation of biomedical and clinical researchers. She has a particular interest in students’ academic and research skills development.

What was your first role or job as an educator?

I have been involved in teaching and supervising students for many years but my first formal role was as Co-Director of MRes Health Sciences Research over 10 years ago.

What inspired you to become an educator and/or education researcher?

I want to encourage and support the medical researchers of the future and hopefully instill a curiosity and passion for discovery science. I love working with students and see them achieve their full potential.

What challenges have you faced in your journey as a medical education researcher and how have you overcome these?

Making the switch from biomedical research (PhD and 20+ years of experience) to pedagogical research (starting from scratch, learning to appreciate qualitative research, developing more of a ‘social sciences head’ and finding my niche).

What is your current medical education research project on?

I am working with a colleague (Jody Stafford) on using desk-based simulation to support cardiopulmonary bypass training. With Gemma Ford and BMERG Committee members, we are piloting a project to embed the Bristol Skills Profile into academic personal tutoring.

Who are your medical education/education research role models?

My mum worked as a school lab technician and was full of ideas to add interest to the classroom (many projects were tried out at home from stick insects to eyeballs to hatching chicks). The school and university lecturers who stick in my mind (along with what they taught) were really enthusiastic and committed to our learning, with a bit of showmanship and eccentricity thrown in!

What would you consider your greatest academic success?

My first, first author paper – perhaps not my greatest academic success but it felt like it at the time.

Have you ever had a piece of work go wrong and how did you deal with this?

Yes! Who hasn’t?! This is particularly true of biomedical research which can be a roller coaster of highs and lows – you need patience and resilience and to try and let the highs carry you through the lows. You learn more from work not going the way you expect / hope – problem solving, criticality, insight. The important thing is that you do learn and don’t – to misquote Einstein – do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. I bang on about this a lot to my students!

What helps you to maintain your work life balance as a medical educator/researcher?

A nagging husband who thinks I love the University of Bristol more than him! To be more serious, work can be such a big part of your identity so it’s important to be doing something that you really care about. Prioritising family (I am bonus mum to 2 step-daughters – a primary school teacher and a nurse), friends and outside interests (travel, gardening and running) can enhance your A game at work.

What do you think will be the greatest change to medical education over the next decade?

At the moment I’m grappling with artificial intelligence (AI) and the challenges and opportunites it brings to teaching and learning per se. Besides this, it is essential to integrate understanding of the potential (and pitfalls) of AI to transform medical practice into medical education curricula.

What book are you reading at the moment?

I have recently read Lessons in Chemistry by Bonnie Garmus – after being fired from her job as a lab tech, chemist Elizabeth Zott uses her new job hosting a 1950s television cooking show titled Supper at Six to educate housewives on scientific topics.

What job would you do if you were not a medical educator/researcher?

I probably would have done something clinical / patient-focussed. My retirement job idea is to be a florist.

What three top tips would you give to new medical education researchers?

  1. Collaborate: 2+ heads are better than one, there’s shared expertise and work-load and you are accountable to others which helps keeps you on track.
  2. Just do it: Make a start – fail, flounder – but do something. If you don’t start you will never have the opportunity to finish.
  3. Be a lifelong learner: Stay curious and open-minded, and being a student helps you put yourself in the shoes of your own students and be reminded of their perspective.

Where is your favourite place in the world and why?

Difficult to choose one favourite – lots of places hold special memories for all sorts of reasons – but I got engaged on the Franz Josef Glacier in New Zealand which was pretty cool (literally!).

Introducing the BMERG blog editors and the new series of BMERG blogs

Posted on by andrew.bond

It’s the beginning of a new academic year and our BMERG blog series kicks off with an introduction to our new BMERG blog editors – and a call for blog writers.

“Blog Text” by Words as Pictures/ CC0 1.0

Following a refresh of the BMERG Committee and the opportunity to take on new roles, Dr Sally Dowling and Dr Andrew Bond have volunteered to be the new BMERG Blog editors. They will be doing this under the expert supervision of Dr Sarah Allsop. Sarah has overseen the blog brilliantly for the past few years, and Sally and Andrew are very grateful to have her expertise to draw on as they take on the role.

Who are we?

Dr Sally Dowling is a Senior Lecturer who has worked in health professions education since 2007, following a career in the NHS. She came to work in Bristol Medical School in January 2022 and currently holds positions in PGT programmes (Health Professions Education and as co-Programme Director for the MSc Reproduction and Development). She also works as Year 1 Student Choice Academic Lead on the MBChB programme. Sally has been a BMERG Committee member since 2022. She has been involved in several BILT-funded associate projects, including one looking at inclusive assessment. In 2024-25 and continuing in 2025-26, she is part of the Pedagogic research and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL) culture project, working with colleagues across the university. She has an interest in supporting staff and student in writing for publication and has run workshops and written blog posts relating to this.

Dr Andrew Bond is a Lecturer in Cardiovascular Medicine, in Bristol Medical School, and Co-Director of MSc Cardiovascular Perfusion. He has over 20 years of experience as a scientific researcher in UK academia, undertaking and publishing a variety of research into atherosclerosis, paediatric heart surgery, islet transplantation for Type I diabetes, and bioengineering of blood vessels for heart bypass surgery. In 2023 he switched to the Teaching and Scholarship Pathway at the University of Bristol, and his teaching role predominantly involves developing and delivering content on the MSc Translational Cardiovascular Medicine, MSc Clinical Perfusion Science and MSc Cardiovascular Perfusion. He is co-lead for various units on the three courses. Andrew recently joined the BMERG Committee, and sees it as the beginning of his pursuit of pedagogical research, and the chance to better understand how students learn and thrive. His hope is to integrate insights from this research into his own teaching practice, so that research and practice continually inform one another.

What is a blog post?

Blog posts are short pieces of writing highlighting topics of interest, usually written in an informal, accessible or conversational style. Some blogs are focussed on a specific issue; others are more general. Writing a blog is a way of sharing your ideas, experiences and opinions – it also gives you a permanent URL from which your writing can be accessed.

What can I write about for in a BMERG blog?

The BMERG blogs are aimed at the medical education community at the University of Bristol and beyond. In the past some have been themed – for example about “Writing for Publication” or reporting on papers discussed at the BMERG Journal Club. We have had conference reports (such as this one) and advice on Academic Careers and Researcher Skills, and other staff development and teaching practice issues. Individual BMERG members have written about their research projects, events they have attended or activities they’ve been involved in. If you look at the BMERG Blog page of the BMERG website you can see the latest Blog posts, and search by topics or categories.

What will we be doing?

This post relaunches the BMERG Blog. Following this we hope to have a new blog published on alternate Fridays. To open the new series, we will publish topic blogs once each month and introduce a member of the Committee in the second blog. To whet your appetite – we have forthcoming blogs on the ASME conference 2025 and the Assessment in Higher Education Conference 2025, a blog on ‘Starting out in pedagogical research’ and introductions to the new BMERG chair and others on the committee. We’ll also be re-posting some earlier blogs about writing for publication and understanding Open Access publication.

Can I write a blog post?

Yes please! We would love to hear from anyone who would like to write a blog post for BMERG. We ask that you use this form to submit your details and the text of your blog. We will review all blogs submitted and let you know if any (usually minor) edits are needed. We’ll also let you know when we are scheduling the publication of your blog. Please let us know if you think there is a reason to publish your blog as soon as possible (for example, if it’s addressing a particularly current or timely issue).

In the next BMERG blog post Dani O’Connor will be writing about ‘Reflections from ASME 2025, AI, Assessment & Agency in Health Professions Education’.

Conference Report: 12 Months On: Reflecting on the GP Placement Capacity Symposium

Posted on by sarah.allsop

In this week’s blog, Dr Simon Thornton reflects on his experience at last years GP Placement Capacity Symposium held jointly between Newcastle, UCL, Southampton and Bristol Universities, and thinking about the continued impact of the discussions held.

Medical Student Consultation Skills. Image (c) University of Bristol.

It’s now a year since the inaugural GP Placement Capacity Symposium, held on 12th June 2024. The event, hosted online, brought together over 100 delegates from medical schools across the UK in a shared effort to address one of the most pressing issues in undergraduate medical education: the growing difficulty in securing enough GP placements for students.

Across the UK, medical schools have been responding with creativity and determination to navigate placement shortfalls. The symposium was the brainchild of Dr Mike Harrison, NIHR doctoral fellow at the University of Newcastle, working in collaboration with colleagues from UCL, the University of Southampton, and the University of Bristol. Their aim, to provide a platform to share the innovations that are helping ease the strain on GP placement capacity.

The event itself was a lively showcase of 11 elevator-pitch presentations, followed by thoughtful Q&A. Innovations ranged from the technological—such as using smart glasses for remote teaching from Ukraine—to political advocacy, including efforts to engage MPs on the realities facing undergraduate GP education.

Several strong themes emerged from the symposium and have continued to shape discussion and development since:

1. Space and Time Constraints

These were—and remain—some of the most fundamental barriers to expanding GP placement capacity. In response, we saw examples like the Sunderland initiative using sessional GPs and vacant NHS Property Services buildings for dedicated teaching clinics. Brighton’s model, offering students out-of-area placements across the UK, continues to offer flexibility and relieve pressure on local practices.

2. Expanding the Supervisory Pool

With fewer GPs and a more diverse primary care workforce, schools have had to think differently about who can deliver teaching. Newcastle reported promising outcomes from involving GP trainees in student education, now contributing 5–10% of teaching. They also shared an innovative frailty clerkship led by a nurse practitioner—an example of how interdisciplinary models can support supervision. This year at Bristol, we’ve hosted our first pair of GP trainees in the GP teaching team. 

3. Embracing Technology

Smart glasses made headlines during the symposium, allowing students to experience remote consultations not just within the UK, but internationally offering a scalable solution to some logistical placement challenges.

4. Rethinking Timing

St George’s highlighted their use of out-of-hours placements—a necessary evolution to cope with daytime constraints. Over the past year, other schools have begun exploring similar strategies, offering students exposure to general practice during evenings and weekends.

5. Cultural and Professional Considerations

Perhaps one of the most thought-provoking points came from a recent survey discussed at the symposium: some GP practices are hesitant to accept students due to concerns around a perceived ‘erosion of professional behaviour’, fearing the placement of a ‘problem student.’ This insight sparked important conversations and research ideas.

Looking Ahead

Twelve months on, it’s clear the symposium did more than just spotlight innovation—it catalysed collaboration and ongoing dialogue. Many of the ideas shared on that day have seeded further projects.

There is, of course, much more to do. But one year after that first national coming-together, there’s a growing sense of momentum—and a shared commitment to ensuring medical students can continue to learn in general practice, despite the challenges.

Let’s see what the next twelve months bring.

You can view the programme for this event at blogs.ncl.ac.uk/gpmeded/conferences/

Building Community: BMERG Journal Club Review, Co-learning and Co-teaching

Posted on by sarah.allsop

Contributing to our BMERG blog series on building community, our BMERG Journal Club lead Dr Claire Hudson reflects on the discussions at our journal club about co-learning and co-teaching.  

Paper reviewed: Claessen, Roy J M et al. “Co-learning and co-teaching in a newly introduced research learning community.” The clinical teacher vol. 21,3 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13683 

I really enjoyed discussing and reflecting on this paper. It captures what is great about our Journal Club; taking a small break in your day to chat about research with colleagues, and generating new ideas that could be applied to your own teaching practice at the same time! 

First, I’ll give an overview of the publication, followed by key takeaways from our discussion.  

What was the research?

The research is based within a Dutch Medical School, and the paper evaluates the move from traditional research project supervision (one-to-one) to a more collaborative model involving co-learning and co-teaching, something they call Research Learning Communities (RLCs). The format paired small groups of students with two teaching staff and a floating ‘research expert’ (visualised in one of the paper’s figures). This idea arose from the flip to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, however the emphasis of the paper is on collaborative, rather than online, learning.  

Before reading the full article, I checked a couple of definitions to ensure I fully understood their approach. Here they are, in case you are also unsure! 

  • Co-learning – breaching the traditional teacher-student hierarchy, and everyone is considered a learner. Knowledge is constructed together, with all participants contributing their expertise and experience. 
  • Co-teaching – multiple educators collaborating to plan and deliver teaching based on their different expertise. This enhances the student experience and supports ongoing professional development for staff. 

Essentially, the RLCs are a highly collaborative approach in which students learn from teachers, teachers learn from students, students learn from each other, and teachers also learn from each other – that’s a lot of learning! I really liked the idea and was keen to read on. 

What were the findings? 

The study assessed both student learning (in terms of research skills) and the perceived value of the collaborative learning. They collected research reports and reflections from students and conducted focus groups with both staff and students.  

Learning goals around research skills were met. Students found the structure supportive and valued peer-learning, reporting that they learned beyond their individual topic. Educators also reported that the structure supported their professional development and recognised benefits for students; although they were unsure whether the approach was time-efficient overall.  

Why did this study resonate?

The co-learning model mimics a real-world research team, supporting the development of teamworking and research skills in authentic contexts. Co-creation with students, peer-learning, and authentic learning align with current pedagogic trends, and also with the ‘student-centred’ pillar of our institutional education strategy. 

At the same time, there are ongoing discussions about reducing staff workload while maintaining the quality of teaching, plus an increased demand for research projects. The study sparked particular interest as it suggested ways to rethink research supervision while increasing authenticity.  

How could this model be applied or adapted for our own practice? 

Many features of this approach are already evident within teaching in the Bristol Medical School, such as case-based learning, group projects for ‘Student Choice’, and other small-group activities. After identifying these, we applied similar principles to research projects in both undergraduate and postgraduate contexts: 

  • Facilitating group themes: A group of students work on a broad, overarching theme, with students pursuing individual but linked research questions within that theme. The collaborative work could involve exploring the wider topic and co-creating individual sub-projects.  
  • Adjunctive research collaboratives: Alternatively, collaboratively learning groups could be created for students undertaking similar types of research (e.g. systematic review, data analysis or lab projects). The collaborative group would foster development of research skills, but the projects themselves could be different.  

Potential benefits:  

  • Multiple ‘supervisors’ and peer-interactions may improve student support and mitigate the common issue that some primary supervisors are less engaged than others….. 
  • I often find myself saying the same things again and again in one-to-one supervisory meetings with students—group formats could definitely reduce this inefficiency! 
  • Research projects can feel isolating and lonely for students, as they often involve extended periods of independent study. Collaborative models would introduce peer interaction and support. 

Additional reflections and comments 

Describing the activities: Details of the group activities were somewhat vague, at least to me. Specific examples of how a single research project was supported within the RLCs would help readers understand how this model could be applied. 

Inclusivity concerns: We questioned whether all students would benefit equally from this approach, or whether it inadvertently disadvantages more introverted students or those who prefer more structured guidance. 

The digital context: While the redesign was partially in response to COVID-19, the digital aspects were not well explored in the paper. 

Overall reflections

This paper invites us to explore co-learning and co-teaching in greater depth, and has already prompted me to generate ideas that could be integrated into my own teaching practice. The overall approach aligns well with contemporary trends in education and facilitated valuable conversations about sustainable and inclusive project supervision in higher education. 

If you already integrate collaborative elements into student research projects, I’d love to hear about your experiences and what works well for you! 

Author Biography  

Dr Claire Hudson is a Lecturer on the Teaching and Scholarship Pathway within the Bristol Medical School. Claire’s early research career was in biomedical sciences, but she has now made a transition to pedagogic research. She has a special interest in student autonomy and the use of reflective practice in developing academic and feedback literacy skills, as well as exploring MSc student skills development in different demographic groups. 

Building Community: BMERG Journal Club Review, Medical Education Research Labs

Posted on by sarah.allsop

The BMERG blog series on building community continues to grow, with a review of our recent journal club publication. Our BMERG Journal Club lead Dr Claire Hudson reflects on the discussion from our May journal club on the establishment of medical education research labs.

Paper reviewed: Gisondi, Michael A. et al. The Purpose, Design, and Promise of Medical Education Research Labs. Academic Medicine 97(9):p 1281-1288, September 2022. https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/toc/2022/09000

Since my colleagues launched the Bristol Medical Education Research Group (BMERG), our discussions have focused on creating a productive research environment and increasing the impact of our work as education researchers.

Education research often struggles to get sufficient recognition and lucrative funding compared to basic and clinical sciences research, and many believe basic science research is held in higher esteem and more valued by their institutions.

This paper resonated with members of the BMERG Journal Club, as the authors echo some of these concerns and challenges.  The authors offer their perspective on the significance of medical education research labs and offer a practical roadmap for their establishment and success.

Publication overview

The paper falls under the category of ‘Scholarly Perspective’, and we discussed that it shouldn’t be interpreted as an objective literature review or primary research. The team of authors have presented a collection of case studies from their own experiences, identifying five main medical education research structures:

  • single principal investigator (PI) labs
  • multiple PI labs
  • research centres
  • research collaboratives
  • research networks

The contributors were assembled through existing professional relationships, therefore we questioned whether the categories presented fully reflect the entire range of medical education research structures. However, we accepted this was their ‘Scholarly Perspective’, and we think they effectively conveyed their vision for the future of medical education research, with research labs being central to this.

What is a medical education research lab?

This is an important question! The authors define a lab as,

A distinct team within a department or institution led by single or multiple PIs who focus on specific educational problems

Labs differ from larger research centres, collaboratives, and networks in their scale and scope. The paper provides illustrative case examples to demonstrate how different research structures function in practice, and we found this information both useful and well-presented. As all authors are based in the US, we questioned whether the same structures could be identified in the UK.

What are the benefits of an medical education research lab?

The authors outline several key elements that they consider contribute to the success of medical education research labs:

  1. Lab Identity: The lab should have a focussed line of research that can validate the career path of the PI(s).
  2. Lab designation: The ‘lab’ brand helps signal the importance and legitimacy of the research being conducted, since the lab structure is generally well-understood within medicine. The identity and designation together can attract collaborators, funding, and institutional support.
  3. Infrastructure: Proper infrastructure is crucial; and includes not only physical space and administrative support but also access to necessary research tools and technologies.
  4. Training: Research labs should serve as incubators for new talent. They should provide training and mentorship for students and junior staff, fostering the next generation of medical education researchers.

Did we agree?

Point 2. above on lab designation, sparked our next discussion: do we agree with using the term “lab” in the context of medical education?

We had an interesting debate about the appropriateness of making comparisons to a scientific research environment, and interestingly there was a split of opinion between our qualitative and quantitative colleagues!

We certainly didn’t agree that this nomenclature was essential for research legitimacy (as suggested by the authors), and we descended into brainstorming for other potential terminology for a collection of education researchers; “hub”, “village”, “incubator”, “collective” and even “tribe” were suggested!

Overall reflections

In summary, the authors present a compelling argument for the establishment of research labs as a means to overcome the challenges faced by medical education researchers; providing structured support, fostering collaboration, training new researchers, enhancing research productivity, and elevating the status of medical education research within academic institutions. The paper offers practical insights into the design of these labs, making it a useful resource for anyone involved in medical education research.  It would be interesting to find out more about whether the institutional barriers to establishing such groups are the same in the US as the UK, and within the BMERG Journal Club, we are still on the fence with the word ‘lab’!

More about this blog’s author:

Dr Claire Hudson is a Lecturer on the Teaching and Scholarship Pathway within the Bristol Medical School. Her early research career was in biomedical sciences, but she has now made a transition to pedagogic research. She has a special interest in student autonomy and the use of reflective practice in developing academic skills, as well as exploring MSc student skills development in different demographic groups.

Read more of our journal club reflections:

Conference Report: TICC 2024: The Inaugural CTF Conference, 5th April, Bristol

Posted on by sarah.allsop

The latest blog is a conference report celebrating the work of clinical teaching fellows across our region. Ed Luff reflects on this event and shares exciting plans for TICC 2025.

On Friday the 5th of April, the University of Bristol, in collaboration with BMERG, hosted TICC 2024: The Inaugural CTF Conference. TICC 2024 provided an opportunity to see and share the valued work of Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) from across the region. Building on the successes of last year’s local CTF Conference for University of Bristol-affiliated CTFs, this year’s expanded meeting had presenters travelling from 10 organisations spanning Southern England, ranging from Surrey to Somerset.

The objectives of the conference were:

These objectives were excellently delivered through a combination of timetabled events on the day. This included two parallel streams of CTF presentations, comprising headline 20-minute showcase presentations, shorter 10-minute oral presentations and 3-minute e-Poster presentations, all with time for Q&A from the audience.

All 22 CTF presentations were extremely well received, and there was excellent engagement and discussion from the audience, highlighting the passion, interest and quality of the work presented. An intuitive electronic platform allowed delegates to provide feedback to presenters, which was shared with them following the conference. This approach to feedback facilitated further development of presentations prior to work being taken onto national or international conferences.

The day also included eight medical education-themed workshops, which attendees were able to choose from, across two parallel streams. These covered topics such as the future of undergraduate medical education, facilitating student-led medical education innovation, sculpting change, demystifying ethics, writing for publication, and the application of qualitative research to medical education. The day also included a showcase workshop presentation titled “From Innovation to Transformative Education”, highlighting how we can sustain and build on novel ideas and implement them into future practice in an educational setting.

One of the other highlights of this year’s expanded interinstitutional conference was a keynote address from Dr Jo Hartland, Senior Lecturer and Deputy Education Director at Bristol Medical School. They presented an account of their work in the field of Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion and shared reflections on their medical education journey to date, including their move from clinical work into medical education, policy work, and leadership.

All those involved in teaching or supporting medical students, whether clinical, academic, or administrative, were welcome to attend the conference. The day saw 63 delegates attend from a variety of backgrounds including those in academic and professional support roles, clinical staff, and educational roles.

On the day, the conference had a fantastic atmosphere, with much talk and networking amongst colleagues and peers regarding teaching, collaboration, innovation, and reflections on the past year as CTF. Energy levels were high, and although the programme was busy,  the variety and diversity of presentations, workshops and talks was extremely well received.

Prizes were awarded on the day for the best oral presentation and runner-up, scored on the day by senior academics and the conference committee; best e-poster presentation, voted on by conference delegates; and best social media post, decided by the organising committee. The prize winners can be viewed on the TICC conference 2024 page.

For more information and insight into what happened on the day, search X (formerly Twitter) for #TICC24 to find all the social media posts. If you would like to find out more information about what was happening on the day, or full details of the presentations that were delivered, please do have a look at the conference programme is available here:

TICC 2024 Programme

We will also be sharing all of the presentations that were delivered at TICC online, so if you couldn’t make it along but would like to review some of the amazing work that was presented, we will add a link to this post and to the TICC tab on the BMERG blog page.

Finally, we are excited to announce that TICC will return next year in a new and updated format! The new and revamped Teaching, Innovation, and Collaboration for CTFs Conference 2025 will take place on Friday 25th of April 2025. So make a note in your diaries, with more information to follow soon, and start sharing your excitement online by using #TICC25.

Building Community: BMERG Journal Club Review, Playful Learning

Posted on by sarah.allsop

The BMERG blog series on building community continues to grow, with our journal club meeting bi-monthly. This month our BMERG Journal Club lead Dr Claire Hudson reflects on the discussion from our March journal club on Playful Learning.

Paper reviewed: Macdonald I, Malone E, Firth R. How can scientists and designers find ways of working together? A case study of playful learning to co-design visual interpretations of immunology concepts. Studies in Higher Education. 2022;47(9):1980-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.2020745

I was intrigued by this paper for quite simple reasons; the terms ‘playful learning’ and ‘co-design’ grabbed my attention, as well as the reference to ‘scientists’. Although I am also an educator, I am a scientist at heart. Before everyone with a clinical background switches off, the paper actually discusses concepts that could apply to all disciplines, and it certainly provoked some fruitful discussion within our group.  

At the University of Bristol, we design our academic programmes to align with a Curriculum Framework, which includes a set of six interconnected dimensions that convey the educational aspirations of the University. Ideas of how to embed these dimensions within our teaching are always welcome, and this paper aligned with at least two of these dimensions: Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary (allowing students to engage beyond their discipline)and Inspiring and innovative (challenging, authentic and collaborative learning). So, I read this paper hoping to find some inspiration.

What was the research?

In summary, the authors designed an interdisciplinary activity with Biological Science students and Product Design students, aiming to communicate an immunology concept (for example allergies, vaccination or transplantation) using digital storytelling. Initially, the scientists pitched their immunology concepts to the designers, and then both sets of students took part in regular co-design workshops held in the design studios to create their final products. The researchers conducted semi-structured interviews with the students and collected Likert questionnaire data, to explore their “preconceptions, experience and future learnings of working in interdisciplinary groups”, analysed using thematic analysis.

What were the findings?

Four themes emerged from their research, summarised below:

1. The influence of environment –Being in the design studio fostered creativity in the Science students and developed different ways of thinking.

2. Playfulness as a creative approach –Freedom from assessment (this activity was outside of the curriculum) allowed for risk taking.

3. Storytelling as a means of expression –Translating information in a visual form enhanced understanding of the immunology material.

4. Recognition of the value of Interdisciplinary working – Relevance to authentic working relationships, exploiting individual strengths.

What did we think?

Limitations of the study

We did have some concerns about the study, such as not being explicit about the objectives and the possibility of confirmation bias. At the end of the introduction the authors state “This study aimed to use interdisciplinary co-design workshops to create opportunities for bringing scientists and designers to work together”; this may have been the purpose of the learning activity, but this didn’t explain the objectives of their research. What did they want to find out?

We discussed the limitations of case studies, however, we agreed that this type of study is useful to disseminate practice and generate ideas, provided the researchers are transparent about the wider relevance. We noted that the findings closely matched the themes presented in their introduction, thereby reconfirming previous assumptions rather than generating novel data, which led us to question the depth of the thematic analysis. This confirmation bias could also have arisen due to the nature of the sample; this was a voluntary task, and it is likely that the participating students were highly motivated. 

How could this be relevant to our own practice?

We all agreed that this was an interesting learning experience for the students, and I love hearing about novel ideas for communicating complex scientific concepts. Often, we retain and understand information with the use of a good metaphor, so perhaps we should all integrate more storytelling into our teaching!

However, since this activity was purely extra-curricular, how relevant is it? Do we really have the time/scope to create these opportunities ‘just for fun’? Creating a genuine interdisciplinary task within a curriculum seems challenging, with potential inter-Programme/School/Faculty logistics to navigate. Some of these perceived obstacles arise from imagining a summative task, however we all agreed that creating formative interdisciplinary tasks would be simpler; and in agreement with the authors, would allow students the freedom to experiment and be ‘playful’, stepping out of their comfort zones without being assessed. A great example of this freedom is the ‘creative piece’ produced by our medical students during year 1 Foundations of Medicine. Students are required to take part, but not awarded an explicit grade, which enables risk taking.

Overall reflections

This paper certainly sparked some great discussion about interdisciplinary and group working (clinical perfusion and medical students, medical and nursing students…), but how do we measure the benefit of such collaborations? At BMERG, our focus is turning these ideas into opportunities for research, so watch this space!

Read more of our journal club reflections:

BMERG Work: New Educator Profile

Posted on by sarah.allsop

This month’s highlighted Educator Profile is Dr Ed Luff

Ed is an Emergency Medical Doctor and Bristol Medical School graduate. His role is currently split between working as a Clinical Lecturer at Bristol Medical School and Speciality Teaching Fellow and Tutor at South Bristol Academy, based in the Bristol Royal Infirmary.

He is also finishing his MSc dissertation exploring students’ experiences and perceptions of using simulation as a method to teach human factors and non-technical skills, as part of his studies on the Health Professionals Education (TLHP) course.

Read more about Ed and some of our other Bristol Medical School Educators by visiting our: BMERG Educator and Researcher Profile Page