Educators and students prefer traditional clinical education to a peer-assisted learning model, despite similar student performance outcomes: a randomised trial

Question: What is the efficacy and acceptability of a peer-assisted learning model compared with a traditional model for paired students in physiotherapy clinical education? Design: Prospective, assessor-blinded, randomised crossover trial. Participants: Twenty-four physiotherapy students in the third year of a 4-year undergraduate degree. Intervention: Participants each completed 5 weeks of clinical placement, utilising a peer-assisted learning model (a standardised series of learning activities undertaken by student pairs and educators to facilitate peer interaction using guided strategies) and a traditional model (usual clinical supervision and learning activities led by clinical educators supervising pairs of students). Outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was student performance, rated on the Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice by a blinded assessor, the supervising clinical educator and by the student in self-assessment. Secondary outcome measures were satisfaction with the teaching and learning experience measured via survey, and statistics on services delivered. Results: There were no significant between-group differences in Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice scores as rated by the blinded assessor (p = 0.43), the supervising clinical educator (p = 0.94) or the students (p = 0.99). In peer-assisted learning, clinical educators had an extra 6 minutes/day available for non-student-related quality activities (95% CI 1 to 10) and students received an additional 0.33 entries/day of written feedback from their educator (95% CI 0.06 to 0.61). Clinical educator satisfaction and student satisfaction were higher with the traditional model. Conclusion: The peer-assisted learning model trialled in the present study produced similar student performance outcomes when compared with a traditional approach. Peer-assisted learning provided some benefits to educator workload and student feedback, but both educators and students were more satisfied with the traditional model. (C) 2014 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V.